From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jonathan Larmour To: "Trenton D. Adams" Cc: 'eCos Disuss' Subject: Re: [ECOS] CONFLICTS that SHOULD be! Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:01:00 -0000 Message-id: <3B7C50B9.83E43B72@redhat.com> References: <000701c12699$2dc520b0$090110ac@TRENT> X-SW-Source: 2001-08/msg00569.html "Trenton D. Adams" wrote: > > The following two items were required by the File I/O package. When I > removed that package they were not disabled. As a result I got an error > saying that the file or directory didn't exist. In particular, > . > CYGBLD_ISO_SIGNAL_NUMBERS_HEADER > CYGBLD_ISO_SIGNAL_IMPL_HEADER > > The following two items were required by another package which I think > was File I/O as well. When I removed the package they were not > disabled. As a result I got an error saying that the file or directory > didn't exist. In particular, and/or > > CYGBLD_ISO_POSIX_LIMITS_HEADER > CYGBLD_ISO_OPEN_MAX_HEADER > > To be or not to be, that is the question! Hmmm... yes, it would do that. This is an old chestnut that has caught us out even internally before: should values be reinferred every time something changes. Or perhaps even just when the user explicitly wants. Right now we do neither :-|. I think we should at least allow the user to force a reinference. However customers tend not to pay for host tools, so very little development gets done except in "spare time", so I don't know when that would appear. Sorry. Of course, you have the source :). Jifl -- Red Hat, Rustat House, Clifton Road, Cambridge, UK. Tel: +44 (1223) 271062 Maybe this world is another planet's Hell -Aldous Huxley || Opinions==mine