On 14 March 2013 03:35, Sébastien Luttringer wrote:

On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Allan McRae wrote:

...

Hi,

This build was done with a chroot containing only base-devel and sudo. Not many packages failed due to this, and can readily be fixed by adding makedepends. So it seems the idea of reducing our build chroots down is good to go!

As your TODO suggest everything needed to build chroot, can we add sudo too? I'm writing a patch for devtools which change the default install groups/packages from "base base-devel sudo" to "base-devel sudol", and it seems more elegant to me to have only "base-devel".

sudo 1.8.6.p7-2 (currently in [testing]) is now part of the base-devel group.

Am 17.03.2013 11:32, schrieb Pierre Schmitz:

Am 13.03.2013 13:22, schrieb Allan McRae:

...

Hi,

This build was done with a chroot containing only base-devel and sudo. Not many packages failed due to this, and can readily be fixed by adding makedepends. So it seems the idea of reducing our build chroots down is good to go!

Would it be reasonable to add systemd to base-devel or should we rather add systemd as a dep to a bunch of packages? I see packages calling tmpfiles etc. on install so we'll have runtime deps and not just makedepends.

Here is a list of packages that need to have the systemd dep added (if it not already has): libvirt ndisc6 murmur wesnoth lightdm openntpd picocom percona-server minidlna proftpd bitlbee pgbouncer subversion postgresql mysql mpd php fetchmail lighttpd transmission apache samba lirc mariadb -- Pierre Schmitz, https://pierre-schmitz.com