On Fri, 27 May 2011, Adam Thompson wrote: > Make (1) is already effectively a mandatory dependency due to all the > perl modules that must currently be installed, and possibly barring > OpenBSD with the recent work, I don't know of a single distro that > packages all the deps. (and, of course, make is required anyway for > OpenBSD ports) -Adam
Yes, but why should that be LSMB's problem? If a distribution does manage to package everything, or someone releases a LSMB-perl-Dependencies.deb package thereby eliminating the requirement, why should it still be required? The only justification for Make, or any other dependency, should not be "well, some platforms require it at the moment, so most people will probably have to have it.". What is LSMB's, and only LSMB's, justification for needing it? Let the distributions provide for themselves, in the way they choose to do so. If that means that some users need Make, then so be it *for those users*. Luke ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ vRanger cuts backup time in half-while increasing security. With the market-leading solution for virtual backup and recovery, you get blazing-fast, flexible, and affordable data protection. Download your free trial now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/quest-d2dcopy1 _______________________________________________ Ledger-smb-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-devel
