rpms/libxml2/devel libxml2.spec,1.65,1.66

[Panu Matilainen]

On Wed, 3 Dec 2008, Mamoru Tasaka wrote:

> Caolan McNamara wrote, at 12/03/2008 10:44 PM +9:00:
>> Author: caolanm
>> 
>> Update of /cvs/pkgs/rpms/libxml2/devel
>> In directory cvs1.fedora.phx.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv9711
>> 
>> Modified Files:
>> 	libxml2.spec Log Message:
>> rebuild to get provides(libxml-2.0) into HEAD rawhide
>> 
>> 
>> Index: libxml2.spec
>> ===================================================================
>> RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/libxml2/devel/libxml2.spec,v
>> retrieving revision 1.65
>> retrieving revision 1.66
>> diff -u -r1.65 -r1.66
>> --- libxml2.spec	1 Dec 2008 23:42:58 -0000	1.65
>> +++ libxml2.spec	3 Dec 2008 13:43:49 -0000	1.66
>> @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
>>  Summary: Library providing XML and HTML support
>>  Name: libxml2
>>  Version: 2.7.2
>> -Release: 4%{?dist}%{?extra_release}
>> +Release: 5%{?dist}%{?extra_release}
>>  License: MIT
>>  Group: Development/Libraries
>>  Source: ftp://xmlsoft.org/libxml2/libxml2-%{version}.tar.gz
>> @@ -145,6 +145,9 @@
>>  %doc doc/python.html
>>   %changelog
>> +* Wed Dec  3 2008 Caol??????n McNamara <caolanm at redhat.com> - 2.7.2-5
>> +- rebuild to get provides(libxml-2.0) into HEAD rawhide
>> +
>
> Again this causes no effect until bug 473978 is solved.
> See:
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-December/msg00124.html

Well the question is, should rpm-build require everything it can 
extract dependencies from? That would drag in mono and whatnot... and 
rpm-build itself certainly does not require pkg-config to function.

Adding dependency on pkgconfig is no big deal, but the line between what 
should go to rpm-build dependencies and what to buildsys groups is rather 
fuzzy.

 	- Panu -