On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Robert Nichols <rnicholsNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 02/21/2011 08:14 AM, Richard Shaw wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 3:24 AM, Gordon Messmer<yinyang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On 02/20/2011 10:04 AM, Richard Shaw wrote: >>>> I was googling for a way to figure out a dependency chain for a >>>> package I'm trying to flush out a spec file for and build. >>> >>> Spec files don't normally require the entire chain to be listed. What >>> problem are you trying to solve that isn't solved by listing the >>> "immediate" build or runtime requirements? >> >> I was just tying to not be redundant. For instance, the package relies >> on mlt and mlt-python. I don't have to include mlt because mlt-python >> already requires it. > > You should include in your dependencies all the things you directly > require and not worry about redundancy. You should not assume that > you don't need to require Package-B because you also require > Package-A, and Package-A requires Package-B. Those dependencies > can change. Let's say that one day Package-B gets split into > Package-B and Package-B-libs, and Package-A now just requires > Package-B-libs. If your actual need is for Package-B, you would > get a run-time failure if Package-B was not installed. Maybe I mis-read the wiki then.While there is a lot of good documentation, it's not quite enough to teach yourself without help. Richard Richard -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
