[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] RFE: BuildRequires generator (#104)

[nim-nim]

> Seeing an existing example would really help to justify the additional complexity.

As I said, I don't have such an example (and hope won't have for some time). It's just the kind of things I see upstreams do.

> Such problem smells like equivalent to bootstrapping distro from scratch problem. And what
I see from the recent movement out there (non-RPM world), bootstrapping is rather ignored
in language stacks since if you build something once, you don't have a reason to bootstrap
again. 

Since most Go projects do not use dynamic libraries, setting up the deps of a non-trivial project is similar to bootstraping, yes. They tried to ignore lots of things and it just moved the complexity at the project level. That's why the soonest it is all plugged in rpm where there is know-how to deal with those, the better

>  the "looping" would certainly go against simplicity. Anyways, no strong disagreement here :-)

As long as you're ready to add it later, I don't care much (only that I'm quite sure that if it's required we'll manage to get EL stuck on the feature-free, and pay the price in "can not be packaged for EL" later). As I've shown you don't even need to maintain a dynamic BR state to loop, just to test in the install does something

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/104#issuecomment-366436094
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-maint/attachments/20180217/2867d466/attachment-0001.html>