On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 18:03 +0300, Roman Kyrylych wrote: > 2008/6/3 Travis Willard <travis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 7:05 AM, Neil Darlow <neil@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> It is often quoted that, for package building purposes, it is assumed a user > >> has packages in group base-devel installed. > > > > Ideally, the user should have BOTH base and base-devel installed for > > package building. > > +1. > When user omits any package from base - it's on his/her own risk, > it is assumed that base is installed on every system, > so packages from base are not mentioned in (make)depends > (ok, some cases exists, but they are exceptions from the rule, and > should had not exist). I know it's against the policy, but if some program requires a package from base to work, it should be a dependency. That's why I explicitly list glibc in packages that link to /lib/libc.so.6 and friends and have no other dependencies. For the base/base-devel discussion: when building packages, base-devel and base should be installed. Looking at debian-alike distributions, I don't see packages makedepending on g++ either when c++ code needs to be compiled.
