Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426751 Till Maas <opensource@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(opensource@xxxxxx | |ame) | --- Comment #36 from Till Maas <opensource@xxxxxxxxx> 2008-12-17 10:22:30 EDT --- I first looked at how python packages manage to get their python(ABI) = 2.6 dependency. For this rpm has it's own automatic dependency generator. Here is one for ghc that allows to skip the Requires: ghc and Requires: ghc-prof dependencies in the spec, because they will be added automatically. http://till.fedorapeople.org/ghcdeps.sh I am not yet sure, what the impact of %define _use_internal_dependency_generator 0 is for ghc packages. I guess this can lead to problems in case there are also other files included that need the automatic dependency generator, e.g. python scripts. Maybe the script needs to be adjusted to also call the internal dependency generator somehow, but this should probably take care of this in the ghcdep.sh script: /usr/lib/rpm/rpmdeps --requires $REPLY For the post, postun, preun dependencies, the only way I found is this (inspired by kmodtool): http://till.fedorapeople.org/ghc-script-requires.sh Instead of the Requires(post) etc, this can be used in the spec, if Source2: points to the script: %{expand:%(/bin/bash %SOURCE2 post preun postun)} With this patch to the spec I was then able to build ghc-zlib with proper requires afaics: http://till.fedorapeople.org/ghc-zlib-automatic-requires.patch Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1003560 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review