some minor Core pruning

Michael J. Knox michael at
Tue Jun 13 01:23:34 UTC 2006

Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Steve Grubb (sgrubb at said: 
>>On Monday 12 June 2006 17:48, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>>>This isn't exhaustive, by any means; there are still quite a few leaf nodes
>>>that are potential Extras candidates. 
>>I was wondering why we have autoconf213, automake14, and automake15 still in 
>>the repo? I was able to eliminate them from my build tree 2 years ago. Also, 
>>is there any reason to keep byacc? I was able to substitute bison for 
>>everything that wanted byacc and eliminated it from my buildtree too.
> # repoquery --whatrequires --alldeps autoconf213 automake14 automake15 --archlist i686,i386,noarch,src --repoid development --repoid development-source
> mozilla-37:1.7.13-1.1.fc5.src
> gtk+-1:1.2.10-50.src
> star-0:1.5a74-2.src
> tetex-0:3.0-24.src
> pam_smb-0:1.1.7-7.2.src
> emacs-0:21.4-14.1.src
> libIDL-0:0.8.6-5.src
> metacity-0:2.15.5-5.src
> gnome-mag-0:0.12.5-1.src
> gtk+-1:1.2.10-50.src
> gdm-1:2.15.3-7.src
> gnome-session-0:2.15.1-4.src
> librsvg2-0:2.15.0-1.src
> libwmf-0:
> nss_db-0:2.2-35.src

Would it be much work to move these way from those requirements?


More information about the Fedora-maintainers mailing list