[pacman-dev] implement .so dependencies?

Thomas Bächler thomas at archlinux.org
Thu Feb 4 07:54:34 EST 2010

Am 03.02.2010 21:17, schrieb Pierre Schmitz:
> Am Mittwoch, 3. Februar 2010 10:27:43 schrieb Thomas Bächler:
>> I get the feeling that you are desperately looking for reason to not
>> implement a feature that is obviously a necesity.
> I like the idea of adding sodeps and soprovides. Ideally they should be even 
> added to the db files so tools could use this information to create a rebuild 
> list or a global dependency check.
> What I really don't like is magically adding them to existing depends and 
> provide arrays. They should stay in their own arrays. The point where you 
> added the soname-prefix should have told you that you are probably doing some 
> kind of evil hack here.

I was thinking about something halfway in the middle of Florian's
approach and yours (maybe not a good idea):

- Always add sodeps to the usual provides array (but only scan certain
directories for libraries, like /lib, /usr/lib and whatever else we put
in ld.so.conf).
- Add an "implicit dependencies" feature, which would extend the
explicit dependencies with sodeps or whatever else we may think of in
the future. Then add a flag to pacman to ignore these implicit dependencies.

Maybe your approach is better and we separate the provides and implicit
provides accordingly.

However, it's worthless to discuss implementation and concepts if the
idea is entirely rejected by our main makepkg developer.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/attachments/20100204/9015f326/attachment.bin>

More information about the pacman-dev mailing list