Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-grimoire - Re: [SM-Grimoire] Explicit depend

sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Discussion of Spells and Grimoire items

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Sergey A. Lipnevich" <sergey AT optimaltec.com>
  • To: Eric Sandall <eric AT sandall.us>
  • Cc: Source Mage - Grimoire <sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Grimoire] Explicit depend
  • Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 13:52:14 -0400

I think we're out of the woods with both of these, I don't remember complains about either xfree86 or gcc not compiling (that's different from something not compiling /with/ gcc). I agree. Many spells (php and wxGTK come to mind) have explicit X instructions in ./configure, I think step one is move them to DEPENDS.

Eric Sandall wrote:

Hi all,

I would like to know what everyone thinks of using explicit dependencies
rather than implice (xfree86 and gcc)? I just had my install not work for
xdvi because it needs xfree86, but I was not asked to do so (was just
installed linuxdoc or some such).

This would also make our dependency tree more 'stable' in that it would be
a true dependency list.








Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page