-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Thomas Bächler wrote:
Allan McRae schrieb:
Thomas Bächler wrote:
I want to explicitly ask you about the cons for this feature. What do you think is a hard reason NOT to do it?
1) The depends array in the PKGBUILD no longer represents the information in the package.
I want that solved as well. We should only add dependencies for soname if the corresponding packages are already in the depends array. For all others, print a warning or ignore them. Otherwise, (in addition to your concern about the PKGBUILD information being incomplete) optdepends will break.
New patch fixes this. Please comment. - -- Florian Pritz -- {flo,bluewind}@server-speed.net -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJKl/48AAoJEG0WVcFM4cE+WvcQAL55MVvL8szpqwHubgnQsbuu IOhgfsmz2ZiP7jYC9IpuYa4IFd6W2idH0fqwUMAwPrZLM2qE9hDG0l+u2Usoqw0z Akrd0r2JOQKHOC6JtY6fu5j80PHJCZcnWzWJasnuhC+ZVdNznhq5Fqw4HoFLGXB6 EM5NN1HzSoFc6yYk3VgD3Wj2V6O14NTrMC1e3zIO43lSbsJpfgwPYoE/KJfx22NN X5KjERhDpzb3LsY5PKrHgYF521na30JhJPyu5jxBHmVFM5PN5Gh2ebFU210wkg6o 1GkOLfCQQFnSMYXEytg1CZFzdK8jEj44p1oKRHIG8dEzVNPVSjoB3JYqw1DdS/Ed +VaSDbQsWEG5jmkjoZgibVD1BmFsGPr4spP0zz5pPeGsTpkMze7QFka105ZM3rmc 4dPveVtZjXSHVQBtdr4RVYKtTiLBJ0nS4TRAJpMAC2BLo1vZM9hC00srYvn4Z03l 1M6OFn6uS3JhTxJw6fQdFw1rrKlEoQSNq2yCGOrHDJkCyxpOUEZ9V2IS7fZ5JqxT S6LMHnPxKshXXZeP3dewhPHxEb4MbxTofVXlVYn+LfWY4TwbwH+YUe68hHo867/9 yPg1Uw/HmHQHohu1GzhPcHVybhyP1pYVPW4a0ED7k2LHbXFai+4Eh0wKAnGzMwuR A+rU45K+yKs8bfrnPBlP =40Hc -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----