On 28 February 2018 at 11:37, Björn Persson wrote:
> Orcan Ogetbil <oget.fed...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Shouldn't we consider having -devel packages Require gcc or gcc-c++?
>> What good is a header package without a compiler anyway?
>> This would also (indirectly) pull in the compiler and fix most of
>> these failed builds.
> Do you mean that maintainers should add those dependencies manually?
> How much less manual work would that be compared to adding build-time
> dependencies?
> Or do you mean that RPMbuild should automatically add "gcc" as a
> dependency to every subpackage whose name ends with "-devel"? That would
> be no help at all for Ada, C++, Fortran, Go or Objective C, which need
> gcc-gnat, gcc-c++, gcc-gfortran, gcc-go and gcc-objc, respectively. It
> would be plainly wrong for Pascal for example, according to the
> dependencies of the package fpc which requires binutils but not gcc.
> Or do you mean that RPMbuild should automatically detect which
> programming languages are present in each -devel subpackage, and add
> dependencies accordingly?
> Björn Persson

Hi Bjorn, thank you for the brainstorm.

Of course the last option would be ideal. However I don't think we
have the tools to collect the necessary information (it would indeed
be useful information), maybe we could concentrate on adding
capability to collect such statistics to the builder.

What I meant was the first option (from experience). How much less
manual work would that be? Well, add the requires to some top level
devel files, e.g. glibc-devel, zlib-devel, libxcb-devel,
alsa-lib-devel etc; and a decent amount of the build failures above
will clear. Then one can deal with the remaining
libraries/applications, again starting from the top level ones. I am
guessing all related build failures will clear after no more than a
few hundred added requires, compared to thousands of BuildRequires.

devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to