Rick Moen suggested:
> That's nice, but what I said was that, on a piece of software's Web
> site, I expect to see an accurate list of dependencies. Not names
> of RPMs, but rather the specific software depended upon.
I think package dependencies rate even lower than documentation for most
developers. Modules get included because they might be useful, but then get
ignored because there is something better. Or a shortcut is used to get
functionality out of a lower level library that really should come from a
more specific library. After a while it all gets very messy.
The easiest way to determine dependencies is to delete all the libraries and
add them back one at a time to find out what breaks. But this can be a very
tedious process and for most programmers is non-productive work, similar to
a visit to the dentist.
The best way to solve the problem is by design: breaking packages into
logical units with logical dependencies. Easily said, much harder to do.
Like the GNOME team has shown, this problem will come back to bite you. I
can't really blame them, because GUI's always seem to involve horrendous
dependency trees, no matter what the architecture. :)
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!