Tuesday 11 March 2003 17.18 skrev Marcel Pol:
> On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 17:24:04 +0200
>
> Buchan Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Figuring out the correct buildrequires is time consuming, even if it
> > > seems obvious.
> > > I was wading through Stefan's build logs at:
> > > http://eijk.homelinux.org/build/contrib/i586/problem/
> > > Which make missing buildrequires easier to track.
> >
> > Now that is quite cool, can someone add this to the docs somewhere?
> >
> > Also, it would be great if automated bugzilla entries could be done for
> > this, just noting that the build failed, and where the log is. This
> > would really help maintainers, who naturally have a lot of the
> > BuildRequires installed anyway.
>
> It's not always a bug for the package that breaks. A package like bbconf
> has a buildrequires for libqt3-devel, but not for XFree86-devel.
> libqt3-devel should require XFree86-devel, but it doesn't, so compiling
> bbconf breaks. Ofcourse, if it gets filed in bugzilla it can be reassigned
> to libqt3-devel. This is just one example, and imo not release critical.
> Maybe after 9.1?
I allways try to list _all_ buildrequires because of this you just mentioned.
That way you don't have to rely on the whim of other package{s|rs}. It's a
lot easier for yourself to keep track of things as you don't have to remember
_everything_. It's also a good practise whenever anyone else needs to tamper
with the spec file(s).
Chears.
--
Regards // Oden Eriksson, Deserve-IT.com
