cvs commit: ports/Mk bsd.port.mk
lofi at freebsd.org
Mon Aug 6 11:34:21 UTC 2007
Alexander Leidinger schrieb:
> Kris, what technical reasons are against explicit dependencies, in
> your opinion?
Explicit dependencies would be great, if they can be guaranteed to be
correct, which basically means we need a way auto-generate them. Maybe
this could be done in a similar way to the security check target - run
ldd/objdump over installed executables and libraries, record symbol
names somewhere, determine dependencies by comparing records ...
Explicit dependencies that need to be determined and maintained manually
by port maintainers are useless, since they'll be almost guaranteed to
be wrong most of the time for those ports that would profit the most
(shave off the most implicit dependencies) from having them.
,_, | Michael Nottebrock | lofi at freebsd.org
(/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve | http://www.freebsd.org
\u/ | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD | http://freebsd.kde.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 250 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-ports/attachments/20070806/eefa1f19/signature.pgp
More information about the cvs-ports