Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 258706 - gnome-base/gnome-do-plugins-0.8.0 should not require monodevelop as a dependency
Summary: gnome-base/gnome-do-plugins-0.8.0 should not require monodevelop as a dependency
Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: New packages (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: High normal (vote)
Assignee: Hans de Graaff
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2009-02-12 10:08 UTC by Tommaso Pasini
Modified: 2009-02-18 07:25 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Tommaso Pasini 2009-02-12 10:08:34 UTC
gnome-base/gnome-do-plugins-0.8.0 requires monodeveop as a dependency: I don't see the reason for a set of plugins to require a full IDE, and even the website doesn't mention that requirement http://do.davebsd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Installing_Do#From_Source

Moreover, monodevelop causes a dependency mismatch with mono-2.2: the former requires monodoc but the latter doesn't want any version of that package installed.

I moved the gnome-do-plugins ebuild to my local overlay, removing the line of monodevelop, and everything runs fine.

Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Put gnome-do, gnome-do-plugins, mono, monodevelop, etc in package.keywords
2. Try to install gnome-do-plugins

Actual Results:  
Mono forbids the installation of monodoc, while monodevelop (dependency of gnome-do-plugins) requires it.

Expected Results:  
gnome-do-plugins shouldn't have monodevelop as a dependency.
Comment 1 Hans de Graaff gentoo-dev Security 2009-02-18 07:25:34 UTC
The reason that monodevelop is a dependency is because the gnome-do-plugins make system uses one of its tools (mdtool) to prepare the plugins for use. I was not able to get the plugins to install without it when I created the initial ebuild.

As far as I can tell monodevelop 1.9.1 now uses a virtual dependency for monodoc which I assume also works fine with mono 2.2.

Please re-open if this remains a problem.