https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1444925 --- Comment #4 from Petr Šabata <psabata@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #3) > For what it's worth, this is an awful idea, but since the Modularity guys > clearly can't separate base runtime from build root, I guess we're faking > multibuild packages now... > > If you're going to do this instead of doing it the right way, you might as > well add "Supplements: (python3-devel and rpm-build and redhat-rpm-config)" > so that people don't have to notice you did a bad thing and made this. I might be missing quite a lot here. Your comment was fairly vague. Faking multibuild packages? What do you mean by that? What's wrong about separating language-specific dependency generators from a generic package build tool? What's the right away in your book? Or are you commenting on the transitive hard dependency on the generators, which is different from how it was done with Perl, for example? While a reverse soft dependency wouldn't hurt anything, why would you want it? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
