[aur-general] Is base an implicit dependency?

[Marcin Wieczorek]

Hello,

> The most important meta package is base. It contains a minimal package
> set that defines a basic Arch Linux installation. It includes: 
Without base you wouldn't be building the package on a system that can
be called Arch Linux. What's the point then?

Regards,
Marcin Wieczorek

On 21/07/27 11:15, 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,
> 
> -- 
> Cédric Girard
> 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/attachments/20210727/10d204bc/attachment.sig>