On 12/1/20 8:33 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 01. 12. 20 v 13:56 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 01:20:33PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 01. 12. 20 v 2:37 Tom Stellard napsal(a):
False positive because they use gcc which was crashing due to the
(at the time) missing make dependency. Are these packages missing
BuildRequires: gcc ?
Do I understand correctly, that gcc requires make [0]? Therefore at
this stage, it should be enough to have `BuildRequires: gcc` and
hence such packages should not be on your list?
Please don't rely on gcc requiring make. This is an internal
implementation detail of the gcc package, and hopefully one day
we'll be able to drop this dependency.
If a package uses make directly, it should BR:make itself.
I think this was never clear cut if such dependency should be specified
or not. The dependencies, which are at some point added for whatever
good reason might be left behind while they are not useful anymore. This
problem on itself is much harder to solve then adding the missing
dependencies should they be needed one day.
So while I don't disagree with your point, I think the the `BR: make`
should be automatically added only where needed right now to prevent
FTBFS after make removal.
Now that gcc requires make, if we took this approach there would be very
few packages that need to be updated for this change request. If gcc
did decide to drop the make dependency or make it weak, who would take
on the work of updating the thousands of packages that use make? Right
now, we have someone (me) who is willing an able to do the updates, and
I think we should this is a good reason to update all the packages now.
-Tom
Vít
Zbyszek
I am asking, because for example rubygem-bcrypt is on the list while
requiring gcc [1]. This is just one package I have checked (but
actually I have added make to the ruby package, later wondering if
it was necessary), but I suspect that also other rubygem- packages
are similar case. Could you please make sure if they should or
should not be on your list?
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
