[aur-general] Is base an implicit dependency?

[Marcin Wieczorek]

On 21/07/27 13:17, Archange wrote:
> systemd is not part of base-devel, and base is not part of official building
> chroots (they were reasons for this, but I don’t remember them at the
> moment).
If you remind yourself please let us know.

> Also, I would still keep base content in dependencies (when required) in any
> case, because we could drop packages from base at any point (they are open
> tickets for some of them already).
A lesson for me too, as I always use implicit base dependencies in my
packages. An assumption that never caused me trouble, but it doesn't
mean it won't in the future. Thanks! 

Marcin Wieczorek
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/attachments/20210727/74525e32/attachment.sig>