No...I removed an old libutil and went to update xpdf.

xpdf depends on t1lib which uses gmake to build it. everything was working
correctly to do back up the dependency tree, uninstall the old one, rebuild
and reinstall it. This skipped gmake though so when t1lib tried to use it,
it failed with the out of date libutil.

A make update should remake everything for the package, right? dependencies 
and all? Least that's my expectation from Packages.txt:

The package and all depending packages first get de-installed,
then current versions of the corresponding packages get compiled and 
installed. 

The problem here is gmake is a dependency for t1lib but it wasn't getting
deinstalled/reinstalled with the rest.

James

>
>On Sun, Nov 11, 2001 at 01:33:41AM -0500, James Chacon wrote:
>> Is there some reason that items which use gmake to build shouldn't also have
>> a dependency on them?
>
>Packages that require GNU make to build properly should already have a build
>dependency on gmake that is added by setting USE_GMAKE.
>
>> I updated my system and nuked old libs (I clean it every once in a while).
>> Rebuilding pkgsrc stuff is relatively painless so far. Something breaks, cd
>> to it's srcdir and do "make update". But..the first thing that used gmake
>> (which was depending on an older libutil) stopped dead in it's tracks and
>> was very non-obvious that it was gmake that was the issue (took a ktrace to
>> figure out what was going on).
>
>I'm not sure I understand the problem you're describing.  You say you removed
>a shared library from the system that was required by gmake?  And then you
>got an error when you ran gmake?  If this is the case, then I don't think
>it's a pkgsrc problem, or even something that we can work around.
>
>	Cheers,
>
>	-- Johnny Lam <jlam@jgrind.org>
>
>
>
>