On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 20:31 +0100, Axel Thimm wrote: > > Well, here's a big one: > > > > perl. > > That hardly counts as a perl module package otherwise it would ahd > been named perl-perl ;) Well, it is a perl module package, it has several perl modules inside of it. The main module in this case is called "CORE", but there is also a .h file in the Encode module (also inside perl). > > My concern is that if we make a perl-devel here, some things that > > had perl as an unstated BuildRequires will suddenly stop building > > until they add perl-devel. > > > > Not fatal, but rather intrusive. Thoughts? > > I would separate discussion of the perl package and the rest. But even > if perl itself were to be split in perl and perl-devel, Matt's mass > rebuilds would let the packages surface that need a change from BR: > perl to BR: perl-devel. Well, I'm trying to review the core perl package, and part of that has been a near total spec rewrite. I need to know whether I should add a perl-devel or not. ~spot -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
