On 24 March 2018 at 03:14, Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: [..] >> BTW In situations like this is possible to observe how really bad idea >> was building ALL Fedora +5.6k texlive* packages from single sec file. > > Except that is no longer the case. texlive-base only has ~120 or so > subpackages for each arch and also most of the packages that are deps > for other things. The larger 'texlive' package is now a noarch package > that doesn't need to be rebuilt very often. Looking on texlive-base.spec I see ~180 packages but it is really tiny/minor detail. $ grep ^%files texlive-base.spec -c; grep ^%package texlive-base.spec -c 182 181 Good to know that (re)building all other ~5.5k texlive packages is perfectly OK now .. Rhetorical question: is it any and/or at least one good reason why those ~180 texlive-base packages using ~350 source tar balls must be (re)built always together? kloczek -- Tomasz Kłoczko | LinkedIn: http://lnkd.in/FXPWxH _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
