| Summary: | rpmbuild -bp should implies --nodeps | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Thierry Vignaud <thierry.vignaud> |
| Component: | rpm | Assignee: | Fedora Packaging Toolset Team <packaging-team> |
| Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | ffesti, jnovy, pebolle, pmatilai |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2012-11-19 12:40:47 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
(In reply to comment #0) > checking for missing BR should be skiped, then sources > should be unpacked in BUILD & patches should be applied Are there any guarantees that a certain package doesn't need a build dependency in the "%prep" stage? man rpmbuild(8) only indicates for "-bp" [...] Normally this involves unpacking the sources and applying any patches. How common are abnormal "%prep" stages that require a build dependency? In 12 years of rpm packaging, I do not remember that much. I did have fixed some spec files that were mixing %prep and %build (mainly regarding calling configure) but that's the occasional bogus ones. I think we can safely do this since the only srpms that would "break" would be: 1) packages with bogus spec files 2) when one just wants to look at patched sources (rpmbuild -bp) 3) when the buildrequires are not available That won't amount to much breakage in real life IMHO... (In reply to comment #2) > I think we can safely do this [...] If that turns out to be correct perhaps the reverse of this problem could also be tackled, ie rpm --clean also requiring --nodeps after the rpmbuild "%prep" stage was run with --nodeps. That's another small nuisance people like you and me run into when we just want to grep through a package's source. This package has changed ownership in the Fedora Package Database. Reassigning to the new owner of this component. This package has changed ownership in the Fedora Package Database. Reassigning to the new owner of this component. Unpacking sources does have dependencies, and the plan is to (some day) move the dependencies for %setup actions out of rpm-build package into packages themselves (see http://rpm.org/ticket/98). Ignoring build-requires for %prep execution is in conflict with that plan and we dont want to flip-flop such behavior back and forth -> WONTFIX. |
Description of problem: "rpmbuild -bp" should implies the "--nodeps" option Using "-bp" means we just want to look at sources, so we don't care at all if some buildrequires are missing or not. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): rpm-4.9.0-6.fc15.x86_64 How reproducible: Everytime Steps to Reproduce: 1. run "rpmbuild -bp" on some spec file which as BRs not pulled by rpm-build 2. 3. Actual results: Failure. eg: error: Failed build dependencies: ldetect-devel >= 0.9.0 is needed by drakxtools-13.52-1.x86_64 parted-devel is needed by drakxtools-13.52-1.x86_64 drakx-installer-binaries is needed by drakxtools-13.52-1.x86_64 Expected results: checking for missing BR should be skiped, then sources should be unpacked in BUILD & patches should be applied Additional info: