Antoine Jacoutot: > > > Shouldn't that still be LIB DEPENDS because it's using it directly? > > > > I think so, too. > > Well that is a *complete* change of how we do things in ports.
I don't think there is any consistency in this regard. I would guess the common approach is to seed LIB_DEPENDS with _some_ libraries and tweak it and WANTLIB until lib-depends-check is happy. > Most of the time we usually only explicitely list dependencies that are not > already in the chain. The end result is the same. *shrug* Don't sweat it. -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de
