Subject: Re: bug#15108: Updated package dependencies

From: Tom Willemse <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 22:24:04 +0100

Hey Drew,

Drew Adams <[email-masked]> writes:

>> I've tested it most recently bzr trunk revision 115470. All the ways to
>> specify dependencies work as described before:
>> 
>> ;; Package-Requires: foo
>> ;; Package-Requires: (foo bar)
>> ;; Package-Requires: (foo (baz "1.1.0") bar)
>> ;; Package-Requires: (baz "1.1.0")
>
> Those are not all of the ways.  Most of my libraries use this way:

Sorry, bad choice of words, never meant to say all the ways work, I
meant all the ways given in a previous mail.

> ;; Package-Requires: ()

This will cause a dependency on `((nil (0)))' right now, I will fix
that. May I ask why you wouldn't just leave the header out of the file
or leave it empty? Just out of curiosity, this should work the same way
as Emacs 24.3 I'm sure.

> And most of the others (of mine) use this way (perhaps covered by
> your 3rd, perhaps not, depending on your spec):
>
> ;; Package-Requires: ((fit-frame "0"))

This produces a dependency on `((fit-frame (0)))' with my patch
installed, according to `package-buffer-info'.

> See also bug #14941 (still unanswered, so far).

I will look at it, if you don't mind.