Corey Halpin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > In working with my packages, I've written a little script that uses > otool -L and dpkg -S to figure out what my package needs to depend on.
Good idea. This approach gives packages that need not be specified explicitly (if they are dependencies of dependencies) but this gives a good starting point. > I don't know my around fink (the program) well enough to add this > myself, but I thought it might be helpful if there were something that > did a trick like this one to verify that a .info depends on all the > libraries it needs. Because of my previous comment, this cannot be used for "if we find something not in Depends, then crash". More importantly, virtual (Provides) packages do not contain files (the files are part of the actual Package which Provides the virtual), so even if we ban implicit dependencies, we'd have to do a lot of pkg-info back-tracking to figure out whether a given otool-detected .dylib is covered by a Depends. Things like this are very useful, but I think it would take a *lot* of work to make it deterministic enough for a build-phase (or even validator) check. Someone on -devel or #fink (perhaps jfm?) has a giant shell pipeline version of this (and that covers a lot of weird corner cases), that I encapsulated as fink-dep-check in my experimental dir. dan -- Daniel Macks [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.netspace.org/~dmacks ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
