Re: Implicit/minimum buildrequires

[Chris Adams]

Once upon a time, Jakub Jelinek  said:
> I'd say the exceptions list needs to be larger, stuff like
> coreutils, glibc-devel, glibc-headers, glibc-kernheaders, bzip2
> certainly need to be in (ideally as real dependencies of rpm-build
> package).

Except in special cases, packages shouldn't explicitly list glibc-devel
and such.  That makes it real annoying for those of use that use RPM as
a cross-platform software management tool. :-)

One question: with Fedora, would anyone be interested in the changes
I've had to make to get packages more portable (and, in my case, working
on HPAQ Tru64 Unix)?  Most of the changes I made were spec file
cleanups.