rpms/graphviz/devel graphviz.spec,1.14,1.15

[Ralf Corsepius]

On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 13:29 -0400, John Ellson wrote:
> Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> 
> >On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 13:06 -0400, John Ellson wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>Oliver Falk wrote:
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>On 08/29/2005 03:16 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 07:33 -0400, Oliver Falk wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>>>Author: oliver
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>>>Index: graphviz.spec
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>>>+BuildRequires:        /bin/ksh bison m4 flex tcl-devel >= 8.3 
> >>>>>tk-devel swig
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>
> >>>>What's the reason for BR'ing /bin/ksh?
> >>>>
> >>>>I can't imagine a single reason for doing so under Linux.
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>I took that from the specfile that comes with graphviz and didn't 
> >>>think to much about it - it also was there since I took over 
> >>>graphviz... Maybe John knows why!?

> >>Tritely, because ksh was invented here

> >> and its too hard convincing people here to use
> >>bash.    As I recall, iffe depends on it.
> >>    
> >>
> >Well, I'd suggest you to extend your configure script to detect a
> >suitable shell (I guess you actually are looking for shell supporting
> >for some features which were missing in the original Bourne shell 10
> >years+ ago),
> >or FE should simply sed the /bin/ksh to /bin/bash or even /bin/sh from
> >the sources inside of the rpm spec.

> Is this a blocker for this release?

Nope, BR'ing ksh just means unnecessarily pulling in a package into the
build process which probably can easily be avoided.

> To be honest I'm feeeling some burnout and this is not the technical 
> issue that I want to work on....
Pardon, but what's so complicated about adding a one line sed to an
rpm.spec?

Ralf