Ticket #1682 (new enhancement)

Opened 3 years ago

Last modified 2 years ago

RFE: Mentioning optional dependencies

Reported by: tushar@linuxfromscratch.org Assigned to: lfs-book@linuxfromscratch.org
Priority: lowest Milestone: Future
Component: Book Version: SVN
Severity: minor Keywords:
Cc:

Description (Last modified by jhuntwork@linuxfromscratch.org)

From the above thread: I would like to propose mentioning optional dependencies for packages that are installed in LFS. Since most of the packages are never mentioned in BLFS, the dependencies never get mentioned.

Change History

01/17/06 08:46:10 changed by chris@beaker67.com

I think this would be a good idea, although we could simply add this to Bug 684, which already exists for documenting package dependencies - just add package's optional dependencies to the list as well.

01/23/06 14:15:28 changed by matthew@linuxfromscratch.org

The general consensus on list was that this is a good idea. So, if anyone has patches that mention particular dependencies I'll gladly accept them. Shadow will use PAM, SELinux and libaudit.

01/23/06 14:22:06 changed by chris@beaker67.com

Shadow can also use cracklib (I know it's already mentioned in the book, but I'm just adding it to the list).

Now comes the question of whether you should mention all "optional" dependencies, or just all the ones that are not listed in LFS. For example, inetutils and module-init-tools *can* use zlib, but it's not required.

And on that note, here's a couple more...

Grep can use PCRE Vim can use X

01/23/06 14:37:29 changed by matthew@linuxfromscratch.org

(In reply to comment #3)

Now comes the question of whether you should mention all "optional" dependencies, or just all the ones that are not listed in LFS. For example, inetutils and module-init-tools *can* use zlib, but it's not required.

I think the approach should be:

1) Those dependencies that break the build if not present should be listed in the current "Installation depends on:" section. Also in this section should be dependencies that, regardless of their being optional or otherwise, have already been installed by LFS by the point at which the dependent package is being built. Add also those dependencies that although optional, are strongly recommended by upstream and/or the LFS community. 2) Any other dependencies that don't fit the criteria in 1. should be listed in an "Installation optionally depends on:" section.

Obviously, if we encounter a package whose optional dependency is installed in LFS but after the dependee (e.g. package B optionally depends on package A but we install package B first), we need to be very sure we don't want to take the opportunity to re-order the packages lest we have to continually explain why we choose not to have package B make use of package A's functionality!

01/23/06 15:12:25 changed by chris@beaker67.com

  • dependson set to 684.

01/28/06 23:35:16 changed by chris@beaker67.com

Autoconf can use emacs

02/05/06 18:40:02 changed by jhuntwork@linuxfromscratch.org

  • description changed.
  • milestone set to 6.2.

02/06/06 23:14:24 changed by chris@linuxfromscratch.org

Coreutils testsuite has at least one test that needs the "Expect" Perl module, which depends on the "IO:Tty" module. Not sure if anyone wants to install 2 Perl modules just to support 1 or 2 coreutils tests, but I'm mentioning it anyway...

Also, autoconf can use automake and libtool in its testsuite.

02/19/06 23:28:13 changed by chris@linuxfromscratch.org

Adding another...groff can use ghostscript.

02/21/06 20:43:22 changed by chris@linuxfromscratch.org

less can use PCRE
Bison can use Doxygen in its testsuite

03/02/06 22:08:03 changed by chris@linuxfromscratch.org

Groff can also use CUPS and X.

04/12/06 15:11:20 changed by jhuntwork@linuxfromscratch.org

  • milestone changed from 6.2 to Future.

Moving this to the Future Milestone. Like #1673, I'll put this information into 6.2 if we can get a complete list in time, but I don't think we should delay a release if this information isn't ready.