Build dependency exceptions
Paul Howarth
paul at city-fan.org
Mon Apr 10 14:45:39 UTC 2006
Patrice Dumas wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 03:20:53PM +0100, Paul Howarth wrote:
>> Whilst you're here, have you any view on the subject of allowing
>> buildreqs listed in the "Exceptions" section of the packaging guidelines
>> being "optional" rather than "must not"?
>
> I am for a change, but having them optional may be a bit too permissive.
> In my opinion the right thing should better be something along 'discouraged'
> but non blocking. It would be messy to have all those unneeded buildrequires
> creep in spec files.
I could live with that. I'd hate to see us having specs like those for
SuSE, which seem to list *every* buildreq and *all* of their deps,
sometimes amounting to 50+ buildreqs. What a nightmare to maintain if
package names changed.
What I'm trying to avoid is things like a buildreq of perl for a perl
module package being a blocker.
Paul.
More information about the fedora-extras-list
mailing list