alan at lizella.net
Mon Apr 2 20:13:22 UTC 2007
Robby Workman wrote:
> On the surface, I understand what you're saying, but...
> I'm with Hameleers on this one - that's too much of a slippery
> slope IMHO. Unless other admins have a set of good criteria to
> use in determining when to make exceptions (send to -devel list),
> I think we'll continue with the current setup.
I agree, even though we do have something of a precedence in my postfix
SlackBuild script. There the README explicitly states that openssl must
be installed to build postfix, and that openssl-so-libs is not enough to
satisfy that requirement.
As for exceptions, I think those should be on a case-by-case basis only,
and have to go up against strong prejudice. I don't want SBo to turn
into yet another dependency manager for Slackware after all. However, I
can see some instances where an oddball dependency might sneak in and
cause trouble for some people.
I recall when Pat got sick and the SlackSec project started up, that
samba released a new version to fix a vulnerability in previous
versions. Using Pat's build script, I couldn't compile samba on my
machine. For some reason, it required xfsprogs, and seeing as I
didn't have an xfs file system, I hadn't installed that package.
Something that off-the-wall, probably deserves mention in the README.
 That dependency has since been removed.
It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise,
Than for a man to hear the song of fools.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/attachments/20070402/a03ff96e/attachment-0002.bin
More information about the Slackbuilds-users