On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 10:39:16AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
Dne 15.12.2013 11:55, Richard W.M. Jones napsal(a):
>On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 10:57:00AM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
>>On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:20:50PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>>>* It might be interesting to have some script, which tries to audit
>>>BR, e.g. it removes all BR first and then adds them back as they are
>>>required. This could reveal some BR which are actually not needed
>>>anymore, but are listed among BR from historic reasons.
>>This is kind of hard to do without extensive functional tests, because it
>>may be that a BR was added because the build completes happily without it
>>but misses the related functionality. (This is pretty common, I think.)
>auto-buildrequires (
http://people.redhat.com/~rjones/auto-buildrequires/)
>uses an LD_PRELOAD hack to find out what BuildRequires are packages
>are actually touched during the build. Therefore it does not suffer
>from this problem.
>
>Rich.
>
Unfortunately, there are some BR which are needed to pass the test
suite, there are also other languages, which does not produce ELF
files .... So it might help, but it does not solve everything.
auto-buildrequires will find all those dependencies. The only
thing it won't probe are statically linked binaries.
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat
http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Fedora Windows cross-compiler. Compile Windows programs, test, and
build Windows installers. Over 100 libraries supported.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW