Michael Schwendt wrote:
> 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 the
On Sun, 04 Jul 2010 13:22:16 +0200, Till wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 04, 2010 at 12:06:39PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>
> > 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. I
On Sun, Jul 04, 2010 at 12:06:39PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> 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
On Sun, 4 Jul 2010 12:33:56 +0200, Michel wrote:
> This is not semantically part of building, though. I see two possible
> solutions:
> 1. Koji should check the explicitly-listed Requirements and refuse to
> build a package if these
>are not available
As I wrote in the previous msg, it would
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> 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 de
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 b
