Bugs for Sorcery are reported here

[bugzilla-daemon AT bugs.sourcemage.org]

http://bugs.sourcemage.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8855


jakakranjc AT email.si changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED




------- Additional Comments From v.merkatz AT gmx.net  2005-09-22 13:18 -------
What's your opinion on this Andrew? Should we add diffutils to gcc DEPENDS? 
This
would create a circular dependency once bug #9522 is fixed though.

--


------- Additional Comments From acedit AT armory.com  2005-09-22 17:06 -------
I would say add it, even if it creates a cycle.

A cycle just means the order is non-deterministic in the general case, which 
is
what it is now so in that regard we're no worse off afaict. Adding the depends
has the advantage that if a user does "dispel diffutils; cast -c gcc" that
diffutils will get built before gcc does.

If the user casts diffutils and gcc in one command all bets are off. Either 
gcc
breaks the cycle and it fails, or diffutils does and everything works. So 
theres
a 50/50 chance of it working. 2 out of 3 scenarios working is better than 0 
of 3.

Now that sorcery no longer uses make it can potentially have fine grained
control over how cycles are broken (as opposed to none at all). If a 
dependency
is already installed and just "on the queue" then it could break the cycle on
the parent spell. In this case gcc is already installed and its "parent" is
diffutils. Still be cautious about making cycles, in this case i'd say its
legitimate.

--


------- Additional Comments From jakakranjc AT email.si  2006-06-23 17:27 -------
added - fixed in test (still applies).

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.sourcemage.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.