On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 02:50:17PM -0600, Frederick Bruckman wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Mar 2002, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> 
> > [ On Monday, March 4, 2002 at 14:01:33 (-0600), Frederick Bruckman wrote: ]
> > > Subject: OK to remove "check-depends"?
> > >
> > > At one time, I believe it was requested behavior not to permit a
> > > "fetch" unless the dependencies were satisfied (or satisfiable), but
> > > now that everything mostly builds, the need for this behavior has
> > > passed, and nobody seems to miss it. I sure don't. So does anybody
> > > mind if "check-depends" just goes away (patch follows)?
> >
> > I would very much appreciate if this check-depends went away!  ;-)
> >
> > I often wish to fetch and extract something without building it or any
> > of its dependencies.
> 
> "extract" still depends on "install-depends", so no joy there. If you
> just want to extract to look around, "do-fetch do-extract" will do
> that, but as that makes no flag files you'll end up extracting again
> if you go on to make the package.

Actually, you can do "make extract NO_DEPENDS=" to avoid all of the
dependency checks for the package and still create the cookie file.  I
also do "make fetch NO_DEPENDS=" a lot to just grab the one distfile for
the particular package in which I'm interested.

	Cheers,

	-- Johnny Lam <jlam@netbsd.org>