Subject: Re: indirect dependencies through build tools [Re: pkg/33100
To: Johnny Lam <jlam@pkgsrc.org>
From: Todd Vierling <tv@duh.org>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 03/22/2006 09:47:40
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006, Johnny Lam wrote:
> You can force all packages that directly include ghc/buildlink3.mk to build
> with ghc to have a dependency on gmp by modifying ghc/buildlink3.mk so that
> gmp/buildlink3.mk is included outside of the BUILDLINK_DEPTH guards, i.e. move
> that inclusion to the end of the file. Should I go ahead and do this?
Sounds reasonable. We don't usually do this, but perhaps it's a concept we
should employ where it is appropriate. There are times when an indirect
dependency really should be registered because its ABI has a direct impact
on the final dependent. This may have repercussions for pkgtools/revbump; I
don't know for sure.
If this is done, we need to bump PKGREVISION of all *direct* dependencies of
ghc, of course. :)
--
-- Todd Vierling <tv@duh.org> <tv@pobox.com> <todd@vierling.name>