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

Stéphane Gaudreault stephane at archlinux.org
Wed Jan 19 09:23:15 EST 2011

Le 19 janvier 2011 09:07:33, Pierre Chapuis a écrit :
>  On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 23:59:55 +1000, Allan McRae <allan at archlinux.org>
>  wrote:
> > Huh?  How is no dependency checks (-Sd) equivalent to complete
> > dependency checking (-S with a transitive closure of dependencies)?
> > They are polar opposites.
>  What I mean is that if a transitive closure of dependencies is
>  performed at packaging time, then there is no need to check for
>  dependencies when installing the original package.
>  Here is an example:
>  A depends on B and D
>  B depends on C
>  C depends on D and E
>  Currently the deps will be:
>  A -> B,D
>  B -> C
>  C -> D,E
>  When installing A, Pacman will:
>  1) check deps for A, start installing B and D
>  2) check deps for B and D, start installing C
>  3) check deps for C, start installing E
>  With a transitive closure scheme at packaging time, the
>  deps would be:
>  A -> B,C,D,E
>  B -> C,D,E
>  C -> D,E
>  When installing A, Pacman could simply install B, C, D and E
>  *without* checking their deps (-Sd) because these deps are
>  necessarily already included in those for A.

As the maintainer of A, it is not your job to track dependencies of B and D.

Again, look at the problem from a different point of view. If tomorrow 
dependencies of B change to 

B -> C F (direct dependecies)

does it mean that A (and **all** other pkgs that depends on B) should be 
updated to include a dependecy on F ? What if dependency on E is removed from 
C PKGBUILD ? Maintaining a package with such rules will be a nightmare.


More information about the aur-general mailing list