On Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 01:10:56AM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 00:15:10 +0100, Axel Thimm wrote: > > > So let me ask again: What's really that bad about including the > > current *.la files into devel by default (unless really needed in main > > packages) other than a couple more dependencies between *-devel > > packages and how bad are these "bloated" devel interdependencies? > > Unfortunately, the "couple of more dependencies" is visible in the > BuildRequires tree, too. Yes, that's what *-devel packages are about. > It results in pretty much the opposite of trying to eliminate > superfluous and redundant BR. You will find that packagers will be > confronted again and again with missing BR which are only needed > because of direct dependencies between .la files or changes within > the libtool dep-chain. And? One BR perhaps (!) too much for one *.la file. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgp9l9Vu5mVOY.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
