On Thu, 2013-07-18 at 12:01 +0100, Paul Eggleton wrote: > On Thursday 18 July 2013 11:52:22 Burton, Ross wrote: > > On 18 July 2013 07:34, Saul Wold <s...@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > valgrind: added perl dependency > > > > I presume the situation here is that a target perl wasn't actually > > built, so adding an explicit runtime dependency causes it to be built > > and therefore available in the feed for rpm to find. > > > > To me this says that the #!-to-dependency magic from rpmdeps isn't > > really useful, as we then have to go and put explicit dependencies > > back in to ensure the requirements are actually built. > > I have to say I too have wondered this. Perhaps these would be better > implemented as QA warnings (that could be defaulted to errors) rather than > just silently adding the dependencies.
Seeing this discussion makes me wonder: if the target perl hasn't actually been built at this point, how does rpmdeps know what package to add a dependency on in the first place? Does it just have some random hard-coded list somewhere? p. _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
