Subject: Re: changing 'install-depends' output
To: None <email@example.com>
From: David Brownlee <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/14/2000 08:33:50
On Mon, 13 Nov 2000 email@example.com wrote:
> > I also don't like the stealth transition from "not" to "NOT". There's no
> > need to shout with these things.
> The intention here was to make it a bit clearer if a dependecny cannot be
> met. I guess that can be reverted.
I actually quite like the 'NOT', to make it more obvious something
odd/wrong is happening. Actually I wouldn't mind 'make install'
failing if all dependencies are not found, and have to run
'make install IGNORE_MISSING_DEPENDS=1' to bypass that.
(I'd want the failure message to mention IGNORE_MISSING_DEPENDS :)
-- www.netbsd.org: A pmap for every occasion --