Bug 1109811

Summary: RFE: builddep should not require SRPM
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: drago01
Component: dnf-plugins-coreAssignee: Packaging Maintenance Team <packaging-team-maint>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: rawhideCC: akozumpl, jsmith.fedora, packaging-team-maint, pmatilai, pnemade, rholy, samuel-rhbugs, tim.lauridsen
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2014-06-23 07:43:37 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description drago01 2014-06-16 12:07:32 UTC 
Description of problem:

To quote myself from the recent ml discussion: 

Well you assume that buildep is only used to build packages. But if
you want to build the upstream source of a package for any reason
having a command that installs required packages is handy.

For instance if I want to build "foo" to write / test a patch I do
"yum-builddep foo" "jhbuild buildone foo" ... I have the code, can
hack on it, can build it without messing with deps and do not have to
build a package (development does not always mean "packing").


i.e it should work like yum where having a srpm / spec file is not required.
Comment 1 Jared Smith 2014-06-16 12:43:08 UTC 
I too think this is an oversight -- I used yum-builddep all the time to install the build dependencies for an upstream package that I'll be building from source (and not from a spec file).  I agree that the builddep plugin for DNF should *not* require an SRPM or spec file.
Comment 2 Panu Matilainen 2014-06-17 05:11:32 UTC 
See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=905697#c19 onwards, its not an oversight.
Comment 3 Ales Kozumplik 2014-06-23 07:43:37 UTC 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1074585 ***