On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:29 AM, Petr Pisar <ppisar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I think the solution is have more packages delivering the same-named
> shared library file with the same soname. Each of the packages
> conflicting each other. Then the non-minimal package would provide RPM
> symbols declaring compiled-in features like "Provides: libcurl(LDAP)"
> and then each application package requiring specific feature would
> explicitly run-require it ("Requied: libcurl(LDAP)"), besides
> automatically genererated dependency on the soname.
I suspect the better solution is to stop burning effort rewriting the
structure of core utilities for something that does not actually
improve the utility, but only helps with edge cases, in this case in
minimalizing build environments. This is extremely difficult to test,
and as likely to cause fracturing of unexpected test environments as
the reduced versions of "parted" caused in anaconda years ago.
> The magic of prefering the minimal package over non-minimal package
> would be kept on package manager. For example it could sort the
> candidates on size or number of dependencies.
Maintaining it is likely to break the ability to test expected
features when compiling in userland, then expect them to work the same
way in mock or koji at build time.
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
