On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 09:13:01PM +0100, Thomas Sachau wrote: > On 03/18/2010 08:55 PM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: > > 2010-03-18 20:47:35 Thomas Sachau napisał(a): > >> On 03/18/2010 08:33 PM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: > >>> 2010-03-18 20:20:02 Thomas Sachau napisał(a): > >>>> Currently, some packages just depend on "dev-lang/python". Arfrever > >>>> claims it to be right > >>> > >>> It's correct only for packages (e.g. dev-python/setuptools), which > >>> support all > >>> versions of Python (including Python 3). > >> > >> Can you tell us any benefit for the normal user, when you require him to > >> install python-3* > > > > I don't require it. It's only a side effect of correct dependencies. > > > > Wrong. Correct dependencies only require the set of packages they need, they > dont pull in packages > nor versions, which are not used or needed. > Since you claim portage behaviour being right and you dont want to change > "dev-lang/python" > dependency, you want to force all users to install python-3*, also it is not > needed nor used nor is > there any benefit from it being installed.
dev-lang/python, if the pkg supports py2k/py3k (specifically
py2.{4,5,6,7}, py3.{0,1,2}), *is* the correct dependency. End of
story, no arguement is possible on that.
Note I said 'correct', not 'desired'. It's the PM's choice how it
chooses to fullfill that constraint. Now, even if py3k is basically
unusable (for anything reliant on a framework, at this point in time
it is unusable), that *still* doesn't matter- the dependency is
*correct*.
If you want to influence how the PM chooses what to use, that's
masking or changing the algo it uses- not screwing up perfectly
correct dependencies.
Considering that the algo varies across all 3 managers, masking is the
only tool that exists atm.
~harring
pgptUvkVYB53o.pgp
Description: PGP signature
