Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Jeremy Kolb <jkolb AT brandeis.edu>]

Arwed von Merkatz wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 11:11:55AM -0500, Jeremy Kolb wrote:
>
> > Ladislav Hagara wrote:
> >
> > > > Here's my compile log for linux-pam. I tried disabling tetex and
> > > > linux-doc (by saying n to it) and it still uses them. So that's
> > > > probably a bug. I also recast the spells just in case. But here's my
> > > > log. Anyone know what's going on?
> > >
> > > I just tried it, seems all is OK.
> > >
> > > From your log:
> > > /usr/bin/make -C doc all
> > > make[2]: Entering directory `/usr/src/Linux-PAM-0.77/doc'
> > > Building module text from files in modules/*.sgml
> > > Processing file ../pam
> > >
> > > From my log:
> > > /usr/bin/make -C doc all
> > > make[2]: Entering directory `/usr/src/Linux-PAM-0.77/doc'
> > > Building module text from files in modules/*.sgml
> > > XXX - you do not have the sgml2html binary installed
> > > XXX - you do not have the sgml2html binary installed
> > >
> > > So try to dispel `gaze from sgml2html`.
> > >
> > > - lace -
> >
> > Thanks, it looks like dispelling linuxdoc-tools works.  I guess it's a 
> > bug then that it ignores the option to NOT use linuxdoc-tools and tetex.
> >
> > Jeremy
>
>
> Saying no to an optional_depends only totally disables that dependency
> if the software provides a way to do it. We try to support that with all
> software that does provide such a way, but many just realy on
> autodetection without options to switch stuff off. So saying no to using
> an optional_depends that is already installed is not always working, not
> much we can do about that without much more effort spent on spells.

So why is it an optional_depends at all?  Or if it is why prompt the 
user to even use it as it makes no difference in this case.

Jeremy