Re: Implicit/minimum buildrequires

[Alexandre Oliva <aoliva redhat com>]

On Sep 22, 2003, Elliot Lee <sopwith redhat com> wrote:

> On 22 Sep 2003, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> > There is not much point of installing rpm-build if you don't want to build
>> > packages
>> 
>> Right.  The point is that building packages doesn't necessarily mean
>> compiling.

> Jakub's point may be that there needs to be some way of enforcing the
> dependencies that constitute a 'minimum build environment' that other
> packages can assume to be present when building.

Well...  If glibc-devel is to be present, then I guess so should gcc
and binutils.  Otherwise I fail to see the point.

Maybe we need a BuildNoPrereq: for the rare exceptions?

-- 
Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer                 aoliva {redhat com, gcc.gnu.org}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        oliva {lsd ic unicamp br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist                Professional serial bug killer