> On Sat, May 22, 1999 at 04:38:21AM +0930, Ron wrote:
> > as well as a way to auto-detect these dependancies
> We don't autodetect binary dependencies either (apart from the
> shared library dependencies, for which it is easy). Why should
> we do that for source dependencies? I can tell you offhand *without
> automatic detection*, what is needed to build my packages - and that's
> something every one of us should be able to do for their own packages.
I agree.. I could supply this info for my own packages too.
But what then was Ben's angle when he said the hitch with source deps
was autodetecting them? Is this for the autobuilders for different ports,
or concern about having non-programmer newbie developers botching them up?
> If we have an implementation of source dependencies for the unpack-build
> time, I'd say we're ready to standardise an interface in the policy.
> Policy need not mandate the use of source dependencies at this time,
> but a standardised way of specifying them should be available,
> so we get experience from real use.
I'm trying to wrap my head around why this is such a perceived problem.
What is needed that is so different from the way we declare binary
dependancies? Or is it just that no-one has coded support for them
into the source fetch/build tools yet?
Every thread I've read so far about source deps seems to skate around
them like this is some terrible problem. From what you have said,
the only major problem I see is that this should really be part of
a complete rehash of the packaging system.. source deps should just
be another control field and tools to make use of it.
Or is there something else about them I have totally missed?