Patches for shared configurations items and specifying additional dependencies

[Jesse Keating]

On Wed, 2006-05-10 at 22:26 +0200, Andreas Thienemann wrote:
> The second patch, is a bit different:
> While pushing the Fedora Core SRPMS through the mock buildsystem we 
> noticed many SRPMS which do not correctly define their
> buildrequirements. 
> Until the fedora core developer responsible for the package has
> updated 
> the spec in cvs and pushed an updated srpm into rawhide, there is no
> way 
> to make the package in question build in mock without having to change
> the 
> .spec.
> Thus, in order to allow even these broken packages being built, we
> needed 
> a way to work around these broken dependencies to see if anything else
> was 
> missing.
> This is done by the second patch, which adds a more_buildreqs config 
> option. If set the given dependencies are installed _in addition_ to
> the 
> ones from the .spec file.
> 
> While the second patch should not be used during normal use and is 
> definetly not for the fedora-extras buildservers, it still is of
> interest 
> to other parties, using mock.
> 

How is this different than just expanding what is in the list for
'init'ing a buildroot?

-- 
Jesse Keating RHCE      (geek.j2solutions.net)
Fedora Legacy Team      (www.fedoralegacy.org)
GPG Public Key          (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-buildsys-list/attachments/20060510/6b574ce8/attachment.sig>