On Wed Jul 30 18:42 +0200, Buchan Milne wrote:
> > To some extent, I'm not keen on the idea of automatic dependencies;
> > afaik, debian (to pick the most prominent distribution) seems to get by
> > fine on about 3 million platforms without an auto-deps system (the fact
> > that no package gets uploaded until it builds on all platforms may have
> > something to do with that...), and I think that making it easier for
> > packagers to offload the responsibility to create ideal dependencies to
> > something/someone else is a dangerous idea. But that's just my $0.02.
>
> b)be willing to fix all the missing -devel requires in all the packages?
>
> It's not feasible to get all of the devel requires correct manually, and
> how many of the problems we have now are due to the devel dependencies?
It should be feasible at package creation time. At the very least, look
at the documentation for the code from upstream (which, in every case
I've looked at, said, "to compile this you'll need....") and use that as
the basis. If there's a problem, it will be caught, eventually. Hell,
some enterprising soul could (I think a couple have attempted this) do
the following:
Start with a bare system: basesystem plus urpmi, rpm-build, and their
deps
For each src.rpm:
urpmi all BuildRequires
rpm --rebuild src.rpm
spam errors to maintainers ;o)
if successful:
make urpmi repository from RPMS/ directories
for each rpm in urpmi repository
urpmi rpm
spam errors
uninstall all packages installed in this step
uninstall BuildRequires
Of course, -devel autodeps have not posed much of a problem of late...
--
Levi Ramsey
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Take due notice and govern yourselves accordingly.
Currently playing: Rush - Permanent Waves - Different Strings
Linux 2.4.21-3mdk
13:12:00 up 3 days, 15:59, 8 users, load average: 0.19, 0.23, 0.19
