[arch-dev-public] hidden dependencies

Aaron Griffin aaronmgriffin at gmail.com
Mon Oct 8 11:28:07 EDT 2007

On 10/7/07, Damir Perisa <damir.perisa at solnet.ch> wrote:
> Sunday 07 October 2007, Andreas Radke wrote:
>  | Maybe checkpkg should automatically run such a dep check when it
>  | detects a .so change. We should also force all devs to use
>  | checkpkg/namcap/{repo}pkg to minimize the risk of broken updates.
> the day you force devs to use checkpkg for every pkg, i will orphan
> all my pkgs that contain a .so file in them or are bigger than 1 MB.
> i support the idea to use checkpkg more often, but it is fundamential
> to me to have it optional!
> reasons are the resources checkpkg needs (space, time, connection
> traffick) that are limited for some of us (i.e. me).
> i use my proper way to check for soname changes by buffering the
> FILELIST of the old pkg in the CVS directory tree outside the CVS
> itself and running a diff on the new and old one. this is of course
> not very handy if you want to rebuild other peoples pkgs... and
> storing the FILELISTs of every pkg in the CVS tree is
> resource-eating, i know.
> about the hidden dependencies: most of my pkgs contain (in namcap's
> eyes) redundand dependencies specified with version number exactly
> because of this.
> i would also support the decision to include all the direct
> dependencies in the depends=() array.

Ok then... I guess if we want to toss around ultimatums and all that
that's fine. So here's mine: keep doing it your way, but the second
you break something because you weren't using checkpkg, then you need
to start using checkpkg.

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list