9:02 a.m.
Hi everybody,
I am pretty sure, that this was already discussed many times, but I
proposed to drop the seemingly last dependency of RPM on Perl in this
[1] ticket and hence Perl from minimal buildroot (unless it will be
pulled in by some other packages). The RPM maintainers as well as Perl
maintainers seems to be in favor of this change.
Nevertheless, there will be necessary to update Perl packaging
guidelines, to explicitly require Perl generators in some cases, and
subsequently to fix the affected packages:
# repoquery --whatrequires 'perl(*)' --source | grep -v 'perl-'| sort -u |
wc -l
618
This is quite enough work, on the other hand, it should enable simpler
bootstrapping of Fedora and prevent issues, such as currently broken
build root on PPC builders. I believe it is worth of the effort.
If you have any comments, please speak up now.
Vít
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1158860
9:04 a.m.
Once upon a time, Vít Ondruch <vondruch(a)redhat.com> said:
I am pretty sure, that this was already discussed many times, but I
proposed to drop the seemingly last dependency of RPM on Perl in this
[1] ticket and hence Perl from minimal buildroot (unless it will be
pulled in by some other packages). The RPM maintainers as well as Perl
maintainers seems to be in favor of this change.
One other thing to check for is spec files that use perl (maybe when the
resulting package does not). I know I've written spec files that use
perl to fix things and what not.
--
Chris Adams <linux(a)cmadams.net>
12:57 p.m.
On 2014-10-30, 14:04 GMT, Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Vít Ondruch <vondruch(a)redhat.com> said:
> I am pretty sure, that this was already discussed many times, but I
> proposed to drop the seemingly last dependency of RPM on Perl in this
> [1] ticket and hence Perl from minimal buildroot (unless it will be
> pulled in by some other packages). The RPM maintainers as well as Perl
> maintainers seems to be in favor of this change.
One other thing to check for is spec files that use perl (maybe when the
resulting package does not). I know I've written spec files that use
perl to fix things and what not.
Sure, it should be checked, but not that it would free those
packages from being broken. Let me quote
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
Note: If you call perl or python in your spec file (and it
is not already a BuildRequires for the package), you need to
explicitly add a BuildRequires for perl or python.
Moreover, perl is not (and I believe it never was) in the list
in
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Exceptions_2
Matěj
3:54 a.m.
Dne 30.10.2014 v 18:57 Matěj Cepl napsal(a):
On 2014-10-30, 14:04 GMT, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Vít Ondruch <vondruch(a)redhat.com> said:
>> I am pretty sure, that this was already discussed many times, but I
>> proposed to drop the seemingly last dependency of RPM on Perl in this
>> [1] ticket and hence Perl from minimal buildroot (unless it will be
>> pulled in by some other packages). The RPM maintainers as well as Perl
>> maintainers seems to be in favor of this change.
> One other thing to check for is spec files that use perl (maybe when the
> resulting package does not). I know I've written spec files that use
> perl to fix things and what not.
Sure, it should be checked, but not that it would free those
packages from being broken. Let me quote
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
Note: If you call perl or python in your spec file (and it
is not already a BuildRequires for the package), you need to
explicitly add a BuildRequires for perl or python.
Moreover, perl is not (and I believe it never was) in the list
in
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Exceptions_2
Matěj
This is really good point Matěj, thanks for bringing this up!
Vít
6:37 p.m.
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Richard Hughes <hughsient(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 30 October 2014 14:02, Vít Ondruch <vondruch(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
> If you have any comments, please speak up now.
No comment, just lots of thanks!
Richard
I tried this, *twice*. Once way, way back when with Red Hat 6.x (not
RHEL 6.x, Red Hat 6.x, think back to around 2001). It was not pleasant
work, there are a *lot* of hidden dependencies. And once about 6 years
ago to to shrink and secure a CentOS build, along with ripping out gcc
and build tools.
It really wasn't pretty to watch, and I don't recommend burning your
timne on this. I wound up writing a lot of plugins to work around the
dependencies, and it rapidly exceeded the expense and time of just
installing perl.
3:58 a.m.
Dne 31.10.2014 v 00:37 Nico Kadel-Garcia napsal(a):
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Richard Hughes
<hughsient(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 30 October 2014 14:02, Vít Ondruch <vondruch(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> If you have any comments, please speak up now.
> No comment, just lots of thanks!
>
> Richard
I tried this, *twice*. Once way, way back when with Red Hat 6.x (not
RHEL 6.x, Red Hat 6.x, think back to around 2001). It was not pleasant
work, there are a *lot* of hidden dependencies. And once about 6 years
ago to to shrink and secure a CentOS build, along with ripping out gcc
and build tools.
It really wasn't pretty to watch, and I don't recommend burning your
timne on this. I wound up writing a lot of plugins to work around the
dependencies, and it rapidly exceeded the expense and time of just
installing perl.
I understand, but fortunately time is changing and some things are
better now then they used to be. I can't say this will be successful,
but as I said, RPM, which was the usual excuse, is Perl independent,
with the last exception I suggest to get rid off and I believe that Perl
team can now do bootstrap and rebuild of all Perl packages, which should
help with testing prior this lands, so all these makes me optimistic.
Vít
3458
days inactive
3459
days old
7 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Chris Adams -
Matěj Cepl -
Nico Kadel-Garcia -
Richard Hughes -
Vít Ondruch