Build dependency exceptions

Paul Howarth paul at
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.


More information about the fedora-extras-list mailing list