On Thursday 19 January 2012 09:04:08 Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 10:05 PM, Mike Frysinger <vap...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > if it's part of the implicit system dep, they absolutely need to defend > > their actions. you want to change the policy, then start a thread on > > it. > > What policy? I don't see any written policy stating that you aren't > allowed to include system packages in *DEPEND.
we've always avoided depending on implicit system packages. the devmanual was the first attempt and writing it down, but it doesn't change the history no matter how much you want otherwise. the exact package list has been refined over time to shrink things down, but it hasn't change the policy. > There is a line in the devmanual stating that it is "not necessary, > nor advisable,..." to list some kinds of system dependencies, full of > caveats about the system set varying by profile and specific versions > and such. It does not say that it is not permitted. considering all the packages listed have known conflicts for other profiles, it is an error for you to attempt to include it. and as already stated, doing it is "just in my packages" doesn't fly as crap spreads. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
