On Thu, 20 Feb 2003 10:34:34 -0800 (PST)
"Jeremy C. Reed" <reed@reedmedia.net> wrote:

> > IMO, these things should go into the bootstrap kit for the OS. (So...
> > now we need a portable NetBSD curses?) Same thing for openssl. There's
> > no way we're going to be able to spot dependencies on things in our
> > base system, and the chief advantage to having such things in our base
> > system is that we don't then have to track dependencies.
> 
> Maybe for the packages (I listed in the first email) that have some type
> of curses need, then do something like:
> 
> .include "../../mk/bsd.prefs.mk"
> .if ${USE_NCURSES} == "YES"
> .  include "../../devel/ncurses/buildlink2.mk"
> .endif

Why do you need this?? Simply include the ncurses/buildlink2.mk file directly
and let buildlink2 do its magic.

If the system has a "native" curses, then it will be used and no dependancy
will be registered. If the package requires ncurses (won't work with curses),
then the ncurses package will be installed independantly of your system.

And here is the problem: That buildlink2.mk should be fixed to check if the
system provides a native curses, and iff it doesn't, then unconditionally use
ncurses (setting UE_NCURSES), so we get a dependancy.
pkgsrc already handles situations like this one (with texinfo, for example).

And for the texinfo problems you mention... maybe those packages are missing
to include "mk/texinfo.mk" ?

HTH

-- 
Julio M. Merino Vidal <jmmv@menta.net>
The NetBSD Project - http://www.NetBSD.org/