Re: mach needs "redundant" BuildRequires

[Stefan van der Eijk <stefan eijk nu>]

John Dalbec wrote:

> According to http://www.fedora.us/wiki/HOWTOFindMissingBuildRequires, 
> neither gcc-c++ nor python should be listed as a BuildRequires:.  
> However, the default mach configuration does not install either 
> package on Red Hat 7.2 unless it is listed as a BuildRequires:.  I'm 
> trying to build XFree86.  Should I add gcc-c++ as a BuildRequires or 
> change my /etc/mach/dist file?
> Thanks,
> John

This sounds so familiar to what I've been doing as a contributor to 
Mandrake's cooker distro for the last few years.

I have a auto rebuilder, calles SlBd. It uses urpmi instead of apt:
   http://qa.mandrakesoft.com/twiki/bin/view/Main/MandrakeLinux?topic=SlBd

I've been advocating getting the right BuildRequires into the src.rpm 
packages:
   http://qa.mandrakesoft.com/twiki/bin/view/Main/BuildRequires

Due to the fact that -devel packages have no *automatic* dependencies 
added to them, there is no significant dependency structure in them. 
This makes getting the right BuildRequires for the packages nearly 
impossible. This issue and the solution Mandrake chose to implement are 
documented here:
   http://qa.mandrakesoft.com/twiki/bin/view/Main/RpmDevelDependencies

Esspecially with the RpmDevelDependencies I think all distributions 
would benefit from this, perhaps we can try to make it part of a 
cross-distro rpm naming standard.

Feel free to comment.

with kind regards,

Stefan van der Eijk

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature