Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 1221635
add dnf config option to (not)obey weak deps
Last modified: 2016-11-27 16:30:25 EST
Description of problem:
mock chroots have now needless dependencies.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Steps to Reproduce:
22 more packages get installed than with older 'gdb' which did not 'Recommends: dnf-plugins-core'
No or minimal additional packages installed.
Newest GDB build
so that it would work with the split.
I have no idea if Requires of 'debuginfo-install' would be smaller than the current Requires of whole 'dnf-plugins-core'.
If Requires of split-out 'debuginfo-install' would be the same then I think this Bug can be CLOSED as INVALID/WONTFIX and I will have to split GDB instead - by moving /usr/bin/gdb to /usr/libexec/gdb to be used by /usr/bin/gdb-add-index and to have additional stub gdb.rpm with symlink /usr/libexec/gdb->/usr/bin/gdb will all the additional Requires+Recommends for practical use of GDB.
Is 'debuginfo-install' needed in all mock chroots? Otherwise it should be enough to install 'gdb' without the 'recommended' packages.
mock chroots need only /usr/bin/gdb-add-index.
/usr/bin/gdb-add-index is a shell script using /usr/bin/gdb.
/usr/bin/gdb for its full use by users needs 'debuginfo-install'.
Another topic is whether mock should be installing Recommended packages or not, feel free to reassign or file a new Bug to mock if you think so.
(In reply to Jan Kratochvil from comment #0)
> already uses:
> Recommends: dnf-command(debuginfo-install)
From gdb POV you're doing it right. In same cases whole dnf-plugins-core are unnecessary. The question is whether to separate just this plugin or all of them and make dnf-plugins a group with mandatory packages from core and optional from extras. We will figure out.
> I have no idea if Requires of 'debuginfo-install' would be smaller than the
> current Requires of whole 'dnf-plugins-core'.
It will be.
(In reply to Jan Kratochvil from comment #2)
> Another topic is whether mock should be installing Recommended packages or
> not, feel free to reassign or file a new Bug to mock if you think so.
Then we would need to file the bug for DNF first to allow/disallow pulling in weak dep packages.
I am changing it to bug report for dnf config option to forbit installation of weak deps.
*** Bug 1229701 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
dnf-plugins-core-0.1.10-1.fc23,dnf-1.1.0-1.fc23,hawkey-0.6.0-1.fc23 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 23.
dnf-plugins-core-0.1.10-1.fc22,dnf-1.1.0-1.fc22,hawkey-0.6.0-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22.
Package dnf-plugins-core-0.1.10-1.fc22, dnf-1.1.0-1.fc22, hawkey-0.6.0-1.fc22:
* should fix your issue,
* was pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository,
* should be available at your local mirror within two days.
Update it with:
# su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing dnf-plugins-core-0.1.10-1.fc22 dnf-1.1.0-1.fc22 hawkey-0.6.0-1.fc22'
as soon as you are able to.
Please go to the following url:
then log in and leave karma (feedback).
dnf-plugins-core-0.1.10-1.fc22, hawkey-0.6.0-1.fc22, dnf-1.1.0-2.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
dnf-plugins-core-0.1.10-1.fc23, hawkey-0.6.0-1.fc23, dnf-1.1.0-2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
I would expect a `builddep` command to skip downloading weak dependencies by default. Then the mock (bug 1254634) did not need to change... and probably other tools that download a build dependencies (e.g. scripts to build RPM outside of mock). Or, will it break something?
Skipping weak dependencies may have an CLI option, e.g. --skip-weak, for users' to find out that this feature exist and for ease of use when doing a minimal install.
Thank you for any info.