Re: Implicit/minimum buildrequires

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Sep 22, 2003, Elliot Lee  wrote:
> On 22 Sep 2003, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> > > There is not much point of installing rpm-build if you don't want to build
> > > packages
> >
> > Right.  The point is that building packages doesn't necessarily mean
> > compiling.
> Jakub's point may be that there needs to be some way of enforcing the
> dependencies that constitute a 'minimum build environment' that other
> packages can assume to be present when building.

Well...  If glibc-devel is to be present, then I guess so should gcc
and binutils.  Otherwise I fail to see the point.

Maybe we need a BuildNoPrereq: for the rare exceptions?