Bug 1230504

Summary:	BuildRequires on gcc-c++ not glibc-headers.
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Carlos O'Donell <codonell>
Component:	vmmlib	Assignee:	Jaroslav Škarvada <jskarvad>
Status:	CLOSED RAWHIDE	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	rawhide	CC:	jskarvad
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:	2016-06-08 15:46:05 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:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	1230505

Description Carlos O'Donell 2015-06-11 04:31:08 UTC

Please replace the BuildRequires: glibc-headers with BuildRequires: gcc-c++. The new Fedora packaging guidelines require you define all the things you need in the buildroot to build [1].

Given that this package has C/C++ code it should BuildRequires: gcc-c++, and that is sufficient to bring in all of the required core C/C++ libraries and headers to compile C/C++ code.

The reason I'm asking is because glibc-headers may or may not be removed in the future and it isn't sufficient to guarantee the package builds.

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRequires_2

Comment 1 Jan Kurik 2015-07-15 14:01:32 UTC

This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 23 development cycle.
Changing version to '23'.

(As we did not run this process for some time, it could affect also pre-Fedora 23 development
cycle bugs. We are very sorry. It will help us with cleanup during Fedora 23 End Of Life. Thank you.)

More information and reason for this action is here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping/Fedora23

Comment 2 Carlos O'Donell 2016-06-08 14:41:57 UTC

Any progress on removing the unused BuildRequires on glibc-headers?

Comment 3 Jaroslav Škarvada 2016-06-08 15:46:05 UTC

Thanks for the ping, I simply forgot.