On Thu, Jun 25, 2026 at 8:44 AM Ben Beasley <[email protected]> wrote: > > Personally, I usually don’t include reverse dependencies that only use > header-only APIs and don’t link shared libraries in this sort of rebuild, > unless there’s a major security fix or something. It’s probably helpful to > include them when practical, and certainly not wrong or harmful to do so, but > it’s also normally adequate to let them pick up the update at the next > routine update or mass rebuild. I *do* include these header-only reverse > dependencies in COPR impact checks. >
There are header only dependencies, and there are more interesting header only dependencies. I would expect that a possible impact if one does not include header-only dependencies in rebuilds can be applications that use dlopen (and expect the library to have the required symbols) can experience some interesting events. I have no idea as to how mariadb uses the fmt headers, but given the complexity of that solution I would tend to be somewhat conservative in my rebuilds (rebuilding everything just to be sure avoids surprises). Better too many packages getting rebuilt than not enough (and a FTBFS in the future during the next mass rebuilds can put a lot of pressure on packagers in a short time frame). -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/tickets/issues/new
