>> > What's the rationale here? I mean, we have so many dependencies, if >> > you want to minimize them, you have a loooong way to go... >> >> When I bootstrapped Fedora for ARM way back when, I had to deal with >> these dependencies. A lot. Finding a minimal set of RPMs to > > Well, Fedora is not a distribution that cares about whether it is easily > bootstrappable. It never was a goal to be one. If you want to make it > one, then that's fine, but that'd be something to make an official goal > first, by going through FESCO... > > If you want a distro that is bootstrappable, the way that Gentoo is, or > that Debian tries to be then that's OK. I personally don't think it is > worth the effort though, as we don't have to bootstrap new archs every > other week... I believe that's something that the Base working group is actually actively trying to achieve, Phil or one of the members might be able to comment further on their exact plans for this. >> cross-compile to get a bootable core was very difficult because of >> dependencies, and managing the path up to koji was a nightmare. Even >> after that, there were some packages that couldn't be built *at all* >> because of circuilar dependencies or dependencies on them. > > Cyclic dependencies are something that so far was accepted in > Fedora. If you want to get rid of that, then make it a Fedora goal... > > For many packages getting rid of the cyclic deps would mean having to > build things twice, but I am not sure this is really worth the work... Well if you can set a boostrap flag in the distro, run a set of builds, unset the flag, bump and rebuild it's really not that much work, >> So, to all of you who say "oh well" to dependencies... I hate you. >> >> Seriously. Not only have you made my personal job miserable for a >> while, but you demonstrate the worst traits of engineering. If >> there's a problem, you don't hide it or just "let it be because we're >> used to it." You *fix* it. And you make sure it *stays* fixed. Take >> some pride in your work! Do the best you can! If you're only willing >> to do mediocre work and let problems exist because you can't be >> bothered to fix them, then Fedora will at best be a mediocre product. > > You know, some cyclic des might be easy to resolve, but a big chunk > really isn't. And our core OS stuff is full of it. I think you > underestiate the complexity of this. There's actually been some analysis done of this and people are actively working to reduce them. Peter -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
