On Sat, 15 Sep 2012 16:20:54 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
Was about to comment on a review that
isn't needed and was in the list of exceptions, and was to link the list
only to discover it indeed is not there.
Shouldn't it be?
A Similar argument could probably be made for libstdc++-devel
It hasn't come up often enough over the past years. The guidelines say:
| There is no need to include the following packages
| or their dependencies ...
* gcc and gcc-c++ are on the list
* gcc requires glibc-devel
* gcc-c++ requires libstdc++-devel
Fedora release 17 (Beefy Miracle) - Linux 3.5.3-1.fc17.x86_64
loadavg: 0.20 0.29 0.29