On Sun, 25 Aug 2013 13:52:27 +0200, Mario Blättermann wrote: > > > Uncommented Requires don't give a hint about why they have been added and > > what inside a package is needed (with obvious exceptions, such as one > > Python based package requiring another Python based package). What inside > > a package is required? An executable? A directory? A datadir? A DBus > > service? JavaScript files? > > > If rpm adds its requirements due to library calls, it even doesn't comment > this ;) But I agree with you, it would be helpful to have some explanation > what a dependency is for. Well, the automatic Requires rpmbuild adds are strict dependencies and are only added for stuff that is really detected as being required. Especially for libraries. The library may move to a different package without breaking the dependency. On the contrary, a manually added dependency on a package name is a weak dependency. What part of the package is needed? A library perhaps? If that library gets moved into a -libs subpackage, that breaks the dependency. > In most cases we can consult the docs in the tarball > or the project homepage, but sometimes the packager stumbles upon a missing > dep during the tests. At least in that case, the dep should be commented. Good catch. I've missed that scenario. I even think we've had it before that a packager dropped a comment-less Requires again at some point, reintroducing a missing dependency, and a good comment in the spec file would have prevented that (with a hint/explanation about why the dep is needed). -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
