On 28 February 2018 at 05:28, Rafal Luzynski wrote:
28.02.2018 09:33 Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>
> Le mercredi 28 février 2018 à 00:11 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil a écrit :
> >
> > Shouldn't we consider having -devel packages Require gcc or gcc-c++?
> > What good is a header package without a compiler anyway?
> > This would also (indirectly) pull in the compiler and fix most of
> > these failed builds.
> >
>
> gcc is not the only compiler that reads header files
Also, do the header files actually *require* gcc to be present?
I know it makes sense to have both installed but there are potential
use cases where a user may need only the devel packages but not gcc:
- abrt may need devel packages to generate readable stack traces,
- a user may use a different compiler than gcc (e.g., compat-gcc-34).
Hi,
All of these use cases can be handled by some virtual provides. My
suggestion didn't intend to be specific to gcc. I guess I should have
said something like Requires: <some-virtual-provides>.
Best,
Orcan