Originally Posted by
MK27
That does not follow at all (in fact, it does not make sense because one library's dependence on another has zero to do with whether or not it is open source).
I could list hundreds and hundreds of free software libraries I've installed and/or built from source, on dozens of systems (some commercial), often including long dependency chains, and occasionally there are problems, but those are the exception, and they are usually obscure things. Libraries that have a large user base are, as a rule, pretty stable, and that includes there dependency chain. Libraries that do not can be anything. I suppose something which is defective to start with might be more likely to end up as open source (perhaps the developers are hoping for help, etc) but build problems like this (if they are real) are traits of obscure and unstable (you mentioned svn...and some new experimental add-on: what do you think that means?) libraries of any kind and not simply "open source" software in general.
It seems to me like you have entered the arena here with some (silly) political biases and are looking for problems so you can "blame the system" for your own misfortune or incompetence. Nb, that the only person who will suffer the consequences of that attitude is you, because rather than examining the real and specific issue (from which you might learn something*), you are attributing it to some fantasy derived from the political rhetoric ("The bad thing about open source is you have to build it based on its dependencies." -- again, false to the point of being nonsensical).
* "...build problems like this (if they are real) are traits of obscure and unstable (you mentioned svn...and some new experimental add-on: what do you think that means?) libraries of any kind..." Make sense?