unexpected package dependency

[Andriy Gapon]

On 19/02/2016 03:55, Perry Hutchison wrote:
> Andriy Gapon <avg at freebsd.org> wrote:
>> On 17/02/2016 11:28, Perry Hutchison wrote:
>>> I had not expected to find gcc listed (in packagesite.yaml) as a
>>> dependency of the sysutils/cpuburn package.  I can understand a
>>> _port_ needing gcc (at build time), but does the cpuburn _package_
>>> actually require gcc at _runtime_?
>>
>> I don't believe so.  AFAIR, it builds static binaries.
> 
> So would the inclusion of gcc in the "deps" for sysutils/cpuburn (in
> packagesite.yaml) be caused by a problem with the way the dependencies
> are specified in the port, or with the way they are handled by the
> package-generation mechanism?  (I'm trying to figure out which to file
> a PR against -- and I'm not all that familiar with pkgng details.)
> 

My recollection is that the ports infrastructure does not allow to specify
whether a non-base compiler (like GCC for FreeBSD 11) is required only as a
compiler (that is, only during the build time) or if its run-time is required as
well.  The latter is always assumed.

But I could be mistaken.

-- 
Andriy Gapon