Subject: Re: indirect dependencies through build tools [Re: pkg/33100
To: Johnny Lam <>
From: Todd Vierling <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 03/22/2006 09:47:40
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006, Johnny Lam wrote:

> You can force all packages that directly include ghc/ to build
> with ghc to have a dependency on gmp by modifying ghc/ so that
> gmp/ is included outside of the BUILDLINK_DEPTH guards, i.e. move
> that inclusion to the end of the file.  Should I go ahead and do this?

Sounds reasonable.  We don't usually do this, but perhaps it's a concept we
should employ where it is appropriate.  There are times when an indirect
dependency really should be registered because its ABI has a direct impact
on the final dependent.  This may have repercussions for pkgtools/revbump; I
don't know for sure.

If this is done, we need to bump PKGREVISION of all *direct* dependencies of
ghc, of course.  :)

-- Todd Vierling <> <> <>