[pacman-dev] [PATCH] makepkg: Always resolve dependencies When --syncdeps is explicitly passed

[Allan McRae]

On 17/05/10 23:35, Nezmer wrote:
> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 09:29:30PM +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
>> On 11/05/10 05:30, Nezmer wrote:
>>> This change makes sense for me in general. The use-case I ran into was
>>> needing the dependencies when repackaging.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Nezmer<git at nezmer.info>
>>> ---
>>>   scripts/makepkg.sh.in |    2 +-
>>>   1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/scripts/makepkg.sh.in b/scripts/makepkg.sh.in
>>> index a2db90b..34261b5 100644
>>> --- a/scripts/makepkg.sh.in
>>> +++ b/scripts/makepkg.sh.in
>>> @@ -1867,7 +1867,7 @@ if (( SOURCEONLY )); then
>>>   fi
>>>
>>>   # fix flyspray bug #5973
>>> -if (( NODEPS || NOBUILD || REPKG )); then
>>> +if (( (NODEPS || NOBUILD || REPKG)&&   ! DEP_BIN )); then
>>>   	# no warning message needed for nobuild, repkg
>>>   	if (( NODEPS )); then
>>>   		warning "$(gettext "Skipping dependency checks.")"
>>
>>
>> I think I would prefer something like:
>>
>> if (( NODEPS || ( ( NOBUILD || REPKG )&&  !DEP_BIN ) )); then
>>
>> For NODEPS, we can safely skip installing deps if someone uses
>> "--nodeps --syncdeps" because that person is an idiot!
>
> There is no way to figure out what the (idiot) wants to exactly
> accomplish, "--nodeps" or "--syncdeps". So If you feel "--nodeps"
> carries more weight, then obviously your line should be used.
>
>>
>> I think REPKG should only installed deps when explicitly asked as a
>> fair portion of the time installing deps will be unneeded.
>
> Fairly asked by passing "--syncdeps" ?!
>
>>
>> Finally, I am not sure whether "--nobuild --syncdeps" is an OK
>> combination.  I think it is.
>
> Of course It is.
>
> Jemmy has no internet at home. He really needs to build a package. He
> has to go to the Starbucks down the street in less than half an hour to
> fetch dist files and dependencies and go back before the battery dies.
>
> $ PACMAN="pacman --noconfirm" makepkg -so  # and run!
>
>>
>> Sound fine?
>
> Yes.
>
> We are discussing a one-liner here. Should I copy off your line and resubmit ?
>

Sure.  It maybe should also change:

 >>>   	if (( NODEPS )); then
 >>>   		warning "$(gettext "Skipping dependency checks.")"

to
if (( NODEPS || REPKG )); then

as a warning is probably a good thing in the REPKG case now.

Allan