[aur-general] [arch-general] Please settle 'base' in 'depends' for all

[Allan McRae]

On 19/01/11 22:20, Thomas Bächler wrote:
> Am 19.01.2011 08:08, schrieb Allan McRae:
>> If we want to be really pedantic about dependencies, we should list
>> _ALL_ dependencies and not remove the ones that are dependencies of
>> dependencies.
>
> Why don't we just do the correct thing:
>
> If package A depends on package B, and B depends on C, then A might
> depend on C explicitly because it accesses C directly. Or it might only
> depend on indirectly C because B accesses C. We should reflect that in
> dependencies (in the first case, A depends on C, in the second case it
> doesn't).
>
> The result is this: Whenever the dependencies of B change (e.g., C is
> removed), A will still work correctly.

I agree that would be the correct thing to do.  In fact, I looked at 
doing this to the extent of including ever package that a program linked 
to in its dependencies.  This increases the number of dependencies 
needed for the average package in the repos greatly (from memory it 
averaged a several fold increase).

The side effect of that is there is obviously a correspondingly big 
increase in the number of dependency checks that pacman needs to do for 
each update and the associated speed hit.   I always assumed that we did 
not list all dependencies for speed reasons.

Allan