On Mon, 2008-11-03 at 09:54 -0500, Adam Jackson wrote: > On Mon, 2008-11-03 at 10:22 +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > Is there a policy on whether circular build dependencies are permitted > > or not? The nearest I can find is this (obsolete?) page: > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/PackagesNeedingBootstrap > > > > MinGW has one hard circular dependency which will require rel-eng > > cooperation to build first time[1], but we also have another one which > > is only a "nice to have" (mingw32-iconv & mingw32-gettext[2]). > > I don't think there's any strict policy. Right. > It's polite to mark the > packages needing special handling during bootstrap somehow. In Mesa I > just note at the top of the specfile that the -demos subpackage needs to > be excluded on the way up (it needs libglut, which you can't build until > you've built a libGL, which the main Mesa package provides...) One approach trick is to have a special "--with/without" magic inside of an rpm spec, which is sufficient to let subsequent incremental builds succeed. IIRC, the ghc-case, they once had carried some binary packages inside which were used to provide an initial build of other packages. A similar approach can be applied to many cross-toolchains (Initially once "seed" with binary packages, then later build incrementally). Another approach is to "gradually introduce features", i.e. to initially build a package with certain features disabled, use this package's contents to built another package providing a feature, etc. (Think building a gcc with i18n disabled to build iconv/libgettext, and then build gcc with i18n enabled). Ralf -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
