Was about to comment on a review that BuildRequires: glibc-devel isn't needed and was in the list of exceptions, and was to link the list http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2 only to discover it indeed is not there.
Shouldn't it be?
A Similar argument could probably be made for libstdc++-devel
-- rex
On Sat, 15 Sep 2012 16:20:54 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
Was about to comment on a review that BuildRequires: glibc-devel isn't needed and was in the list of exceptions, and was to link the list http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2 only to discover it indeed is not there.
Shouldn't it be?
A Similar argument could probably be made for libstdc++-devel
It hasn't come up often enough over the past years. The guidelines say:
| There is no need to include the following packages | or their dependencies ... ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ (!)
* gcc and gcc-c++ are on the list * gcc requires glibc-devel * gcc-c++ requires libstdc++-devel
Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Sat, 15 Sep 2012 16:20:54 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
Was about to comment on a review that BuildRequires: glibc-devel isn't needed and was in the list of exceptions, and was to link the list http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2 only to discover it indeed is not there.
Shouldn't it be?
A Similar argument could probably be made for libstdc++-devel
It hasn't come up often enough over the past years. The guidelines say:
| There is no need to include the following packages | or their dependencies ... ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Oh thanks!
-- rex
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Michael Schwendt -
Rex Dieter