Dne 23.7.2018 v 15:28 Florian Weimer napsal(a):
> On 07/23/2018 02:35 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>>
>> Dne 23.7.2018 v 14:19 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
>>> Dne 23.7.2018 v 14:14 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski napsal(a):
>>>> On Monday, 23 July 2018 at 14:07, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>>>> On 07/23/2018 02:00 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
wrote:
>>>>>> On Monday, 23 July 2018 at 13:12, Jitka Plesníková wrote:
>>>>>>> I've added BR glibc-common, because it contains the
iconv
>>>>>>> binary. iconv
>>>>>>> is used in spec file.
>>>>>> Maybe it's better to do:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BuildRequires: %{_bindir}/iconv
>>>>>>
>>>>>> instead?
>>>>> We need to add explicit provides first to the glibc (sub)packages,
>>>>> to avoid
>>>>> triggering a filelist download in DNF.
>>>> File provides in %{_bindir} and %{_sbindir} aren't supposed to
trigger
>>>> filelist download as far as I know.
>>> Correct, they are part of primary metadata ... and file lists are
>>> downloaded anyway ...
>> Just FTR:
>>
>>
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/549
>>
https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Packaging:Guidelines&diff...
>>
> Can we please update the Packaging Guidelines to reflect this new
> reality? In particular, mention that dependencies on %{_bindir}/iconv
> are okay?
The thing is that the reality have not changed since the #549. The
primary metadata still contains the data about /usr/bin and several
other directories as they used to and DNF still downloads entire file lists.
At that time, I was proposing to allow file dependencies generally. But
at the end, they are now more discouraged then they were previously. I
would love to see the guidelines changed, but I am not going to drive
it. One failure was enough.
Actually, there is another ticket about banning file deps which is not
resolved yet: