[arch-general] alternate dependencies?

[Xavier]

Neil Darlow wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Seeing the earlier post re. tetex and texlive perhaps there is a case 
> for extending pacman to support alternate dependencies.
> 
> By this I mean a package could depend on one of a choice of packages. 
> The syntax could be something like:
> 
> depends=( tetex|texlive )
> 
> where the individual dependencies retain their current features e.g. 
> versions etc.
> 
> Opinions welcomed.
> 

That's what provisions are for.