On Sun, 14 Oct 2012 17:45:13 +0100
"Steven J. Long" wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 06:56:14PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > A := only makes sense for a dependency that is present both at build
> > time and at runtime. Currently, the only place you should be seeing
> > a := is on a spec that
On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 06:56:14PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> A := only makes sense for a dependency that is present both at build
> time and at runtime. Currently, the only place you should be seeing
> a := is on a spec that is listed in both DEPEND and RDEPEND.
>
> Conceptually, the := appl
