On Thu, 10 Jan 2002 11:34:33 -0600 Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Of course, that's a function of the maintainers and has absolutely > > nothing whatsoever to do with the packaging software involved. > > > > :) > > Does the RPM build process have an equivalent of dpkg-shlibdeps?
Yeah. As of a few years ago, though(when I was doing RPM packaging), it was file-based(ie: it would say it require libc.so.6 instead of glibc2.2 or whatever). That might have changes since, though. Or I might be remembering wrong, and perhaps it always used package names(assuming the library was in an installed RPM). BTW, I see where you're heading. Yes, obviously, a great build environment will significantly ease a maintainer's burdens. But I still say that it's on the shoulders of the maintainer :) -- .--=====-=-=====-=========----------=====-----------=-=-----=. / David Barclay Harris Aut agere, aut mori. \ \ Clan Barclay Either action, or death. / `-------======-------------=-=-----=-===-=====-------=--=----'
pgpUtPP3dzCST.pgp
Description: PGP signature
