Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Seth Alan Woolley <seth AT positivism.org>]

We're classifying all non-redundant dependencies due to new full tree
dependencies (meaning if it already depends on something that depends on
X, don't include it).  This applies to all strict dependencies.  All
optional dependencies of course need to be explicit.

At least, that's what would work best and I think is what we agreed
upon.

Seth

On Fri, Aug 06, 2004 at 04:07:53PM -0400, Paul Mahon wrote:
> I thought the policy was not to include X as a dependency... perhaps I'm
> just out of date though.
> 
> On Fri, 2004-06-08 at 08:43 -0700, Eric Sandall wrote:
> > Quoting Rohan Nicholls <rohan.nicholls AT pareto.nl>:
> > > Oops,
> > > 
> > > Well I guess I must have compiled it the first time before having xorg 
> > > isntalled (probably to have a nice console environment to work in). 
> > > Having recompiled it has found X and it happy.
> > > 
> > > Am now happy with fully functional emacs. :-D
> > 
> > Perhaps emacs should have an `optional_depends  X11-SERVER`? Or would it 
> > just
> > need X11-LIBS?
> > 
> > -sandalle
> > 



> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss


-- 
Seth Alan Woolley [seth at positivism.org], SPAM/UCE is unauthorized
Key id EF10E21A = 36AD 8A92 8499 8439 E6A8  3724 D437 AF5D EF10 E21A
http://smgl.positivism.org:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xEF10E21A
Security Team Leader Source Mage GNU/Linux http://www.sourcemage.org

Attachment: pgpzW1fCnZ0iM.pgp
Description: PGP signature