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: Arwed von Merkatz <v.merkatz AT gmx.net>
  • Cc: Source Mage - Grimoire <sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Grimoire] Explicit depend
  • Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 14:33:48 -0400

Arwed von Merkatz wrote:

On Sun, Jun 29, 2003 at 10:57:10AM -0700, 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).


As far as i know, every spell that depends on xfree needs to have it in
it's dependency list, unless it's already covered by one of the other
depends. gtk+ has a dep on xfree, so a spell using gtk wouldn't need to
explicitly depend on xfree, while xdvi definitely needs to. (gtk+2
doesn't have a dep on xfree, which is wrong imho).

Not quite. The policy still is that xfree86 dependencies must be avoided for cases when people couldn't cast xfree86 using sorcery but managed to get it up manually. So that we have usually "assumed" that xfree86 is there if the spell in questions needed X.






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page