On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 06:56:14PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> A := only makes sense for a dependency that is present both at build
> time and at runtime. Currently, the only place you should be seeing
> a := is on a spec that is listed in both DEPEND and RDEPEND.
> Conceptually, the := applies to "the spec that is in both DEPEND and
> RDEPEND". But with the current syntax, there's no such thing as "the
> spec that is in both". There are two specs, which happen to be
> identical as strings, one in DEPEND and one in RDEPEND, and there's no
> way for the two to be associated.
Now that *is* dishonestly ignorant: you know full well that LDEPEND 
covers exactly that case.
As well as obviating the need for := in the cases that break installs.
And oh look, "required before build, but must be installed in ROOT, not
on BUILD machine"; now where have I heard that requirement before?
So there is a very easy way for the two to be associated, and to specify
the most common (or any other, should it be justified) dependency that
is in both, with the current syntax.
But you knew that, right? You just chose to ignore it. Tsk: that's hardly
academically rigorous. Bad form, old chap, simply bad form.
#friendly-coders -- We're friendly, but we're not /that/ friendly ;-)