Le 27/07/2021 à 16:11, Filipe Laíns via aur-general a écrit :
On Tue, 2021-07-27 at 11:15 +0200, Cedric Girard via aur-general wrote:
Hi,
I would like to have a confirmation. I encountered a PKGBUILD on AUR
that is not building correctly except when systemd is present when
building. The maintainer considers the makedeps is implicit as systemd
is dragged by base metapackage.
However devtools only ensures base-devel is present, not base, when
building in a clean chroot. And I could not find a mention in the wiki
of base expected to be present when writing a PKGBUILD.
Could you confirm to me what are the guidelines? Does systemd
(make)dependency should be explicit or not?
Regards,
Hi Cedric,
Yes, see [1]. Packages in base can, and should, be omitted from dependencies.
This is not generally true. While base can arguably be implicitly
depended on for most basic tools (e.g. standard POSIX things), library
dependencies should still be listed for instance:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Arch_package_guidelines#Package_dependencies
And we are subject to remove some packages, see
https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/64028,
https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/64029,
https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/64030,
https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/64047.
Also, makedepencies != dependencies, so:
Similarly, the base-devel group is assumed to be installed when building
packages, see [2]. Its members should be omitted from makedepends and
checkdepends.
yes, but once again base is not in building chroots, thus anything from
base and not in base-devel required for building must be listed in
makedepends, in this case systemd. I still have yet to find again where
we discussed base in chroots/systemd in base-devel, but this is the
current states of things so as long as it stays this way, systemd should
be listed in makedepends if required.
[1]
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Meta_package_and_package_group#Meta_packages
[2] https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/PKGBUILD#makedepends
Regards,
Bruno/Archange
