[aur-general] Should "base" packages be listed as dependencies?

Baptiste Jonglez baptiste at bitsofnetworks.org
Wed Mar 22 20:45:13 UTC 2017


I was pretty confident that "base" packages should be listed as
dependencies in PKGBUILDs, i.e. they are not assumed to be installed (as
opposed to "base-devel" for build dependencies).

This belief is reinforced by the fact that namcap gives dependencies error
about packages such as glibc (which is in "base"):

    E: Dependency glibc detected and not included (libraries ['usr/lib/libc.so.6', 'usr/lib/libcrypt.so.1'] needed in files ['usr/lib/libcli.so.1.9.7'])

But I could not find any documentation about this.  On the contrary, this
wiki page [1] says the opposite:

    In addition, the base group is assumed to be installed on *all* Arch

Am I missing something obvious?


[1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Makepkg#Usage
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/attachments/20170322/01ab6749/attachment.asc>

More information about the aur-general mailing list