Inflation of explicit build requirements

[Shahms King]

On Fri, 2004-06-04 at 13:03, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Michael Schwendt (fedora at wir-sind-cool.org) said: 
> > Better let's discuss whether above set should be extended. E.g. with
> > 'gettext' and 'desktop-file-utils', as they are needed by many src.rpms.
> 
> Yes and maybe, if you're trolling for opinions.
> 
> Bill

As stands now gcc-g++ needs to be specified in BuildRequires if you're
using mach as there is nothing else in "C++ build" toolchain that
requires it.  If you leave it out, mach (correctly) removes the gcc-c++
package before attempting to build it.  Some of the others are
superfluous, but that one is not.
-- 
Shahms King <shahms at shahms.com>