Re: libcroco and xz

[David Holland <dholland-pkgusers%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 02:56:20PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
 > > >>I see...
 > > >>
 > > >>using *.xz archive, so marked as build depend on archive/xz,
 > > >>but check-shlib claims using shlibs from build depends.
 > > >>It's false alarm.
 > > >
 > > >I can reproduce it now. It is *not* a false alarm. libxml2 should be
 > > >pulling in a full xz dependency, since libxml2.so depends on it now, but
 > > >it only gets counted as build dependency.
 > > 
 > > No, not only directly build dependency, but also indirectly full
 > > dependency.
 > > In other words, directly build dependency on `xzcat' command from
 > > archive/xz,
 > > and indirect full dependency on `liblzma' from archive/xz.
 > 
 > Right, there is no such thing as an indirect full dependency...

Sure. Call it whatever you want. But libcroco does not directly depend
on xz or liblzma. Grepping the entire libcroco distribution for 'lzma'
matches only some makefile goop for creating .tar.lzma files.

We should not be adding a bogus xz runtime dependency to libcroco (and
everything else that uses libxml2) and the checks done by pkgsrc
should not demand one or encourage people to add one incorrectly.

-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost