Paul Howarth paul@city-fan.org writes:
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 08:43:19 -0800 Toshio Kuratomi a.badger@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 10:10:48AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
[ whinging about python-psycopg2 ]
Without python3 installed, macros in the spec file can't be expanded correctly (because their definitions depend on python3). The spec file is BuildRequireing python3 so it shouldn't be expected that you can operate on the spec file without python3 installed.
I'd prefer to see specs a bit more robust so that for instance you could run "spectool" on them to download upstream sources and then do a mockbuild, which wouldn't require python3 or whatever to be installed on the build host.
Precisely. There are *lots* of situations where we expect to be able to parse specfiles without necessarily having all their buildreqs installed (for the most obvious case: to find out what BRs are needed). I think one of the goals of this guideline should be to prevent creep in the set of packages that have to be present before tools like fedpkg will operate on a specfile without complaint.
regards, tom lane