[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Breaking deps deliberately

On 05/13/2009 07:27 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:

> Not really.
> The dependency in any case wasn't "broken", it just wasn't satisfied
> by any package in Fedora 10 (although it was by packages in Fedora 11+).

You are dabbling in semantics. If can't do yum install foo, then yes
that means you broke the dependency. It doesn't matter if the dependency
is resolved by pulling in packages from Rawhide since we don't support

> Someone else already mentioned a theoretical case where a package
> might depend on libdvdcss, which would have both legal and technical
> issues.

If a package has a build-time dependency on libdvdcss, it wouldn't be
even allowed in Fedora due to the existing licensing guidelines. If it
is a optional run-time dependency, we don't need to bother about them.
This is a completely separate case.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]