Re: build perl problem
2016-10-25 11:08 GMT+02:00 Ralf Corsepius <rc040203(a)freenet.de>:
On 10/25/2016 09:46 AM, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
>
> * Nicolas Chauvet [24/10/2016 14:49] :
>>
>>
>> 2016-10-21 22:03 GMT+02:00 Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>
>>> Other topic, but related to perl. Can anyone can explain why
>>> perl-generator isn't part of perl-devel if not the case already ?
>>
>>
>> Anyone to answear the question ?
>
>
> This was done so that packages that contain a perl script do not have to
> have
> perl-devel as a BuildRequires (because this is considered expensive)
Exactly, but there is more to it:
perl-devel is an ordinary *-devel package, just like any other *-devel
package. It contains headers, link-libraries etc.
perl-generators actually is more or less more a subpackage of rpm-build,
which adds some scripts and macros to rpmbuild (IIRC, it was split out from
rpm/rpm-build)
In other words, they serve different tasks and are not actually
interconnected.
Thx for your explanation.
I understand they are conceptually different packages. But my point is
that once you get perl-devel you will need perl-generators as a
necessary requirement.
There (should be) no case where using perl-devel and not require
perl-generators. But instead the "fedora/epel" perl packaging is
opening a gap for this fault.
Now if there is ever a single reason to have the perl-devel but not
perl-generators, enforcing the requirement shoudn't be an issue as the
dependency cost is negligible.
Also a good encapsulation would have been to hide this technical
dependency behind something more usual, so this doesn't break the
world.
Anyway, thx for your clarification.
--
-
Nicolas (kwizart)