On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 13:35:20 +0200, Till wrote: > > 1) To make such run-time deps BuildRequires would be helpful (because it > > doesn't make much sense to build something for a target that is missing > > something). Several broken deps in old dist branches have been because > > of a discrepancy between Requires and BuildRequires. > > If this should be normal, then IMHO rpmbuild should be changed to > use all explicit Requires also as BuildRequires.
It is normal for several automatic dependencies, e.g. for a run-time library dep you have the corresponding -devel BR in the spec file. Creating BR for run-time deps can also be helpful in situations where rpmbuild could not assist you. E.g. an app dlopens an optional libfoo.so.1 at run-time. If you wanted to check for availability of libfoo.so.1 in the dist at pkg build-time, you would add a BR for the library pkg [and a guard in %prep or %check]. Along the same line, if you have an explicit Req, possibly even a versioned one, checking for the required stuff in a BR ensures that everything you need at run-time, is available in the target dist. For Python modules there are no automatic deps set by rpmbuild yet, however. Except for the python(abi) dep. And there would be drawbacks, too, for a hardcoded "Req => BR" rule. It would make circular deps impossible: Pkg A requires Pkg A-extras, and Pkg A-extras BR Pkg A. It would make bootstrapping a dist more complicated. For some pkgs (e.g. leaf pkgs) it is fine if they are not available in the buildroot when building a pkg that requires the leaf pkg at run-time. For other pkgs it is fine if you build them with an old build tool for a target env that is build upon a newer tool. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
