This introduces a cycle between libubound-mini and libsodium; can libsodium-devel please only be BuildRequired in the -non-mini case?

Michael Ströder (stroeder) - about 7 years ago

author

Maybe I'm overlooking something but both .spec files have:

BuildRequires: libsodium-devel

See also the diff: https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/491023

Maybe the cycle is caused by something else?

new cycle edge we detected are - New edges: [('libunbound-devel-mini', 'libsodium')]

so dimstar's question is about whether libsodium really need to be build required in libunbound-devel-mini or can be fine just for unbound(main package).

Michael Ströder (stroeder) - about 7 years ago

author

BuildRequires: libsodium-devel because of --enable-dnscrypt. We could disable dns-crypt support (experimental anyway) for now to get this upstream release out of the door.

---

Dominique Leuenberger (dimstar) - about 7 years ago

Does --enable-dnscrypt change the ABI of the package?

Generally, we should try to keep the -mini variant as small as possible; it is NEVER used on a workstation, but only inside the build system to break cycles. So all features that do not impact ABI should be disabled.

---

Michael Ströder (stroeder) - about 7 years ago

author

Frankly I don't know whether --enable-dnscrypt changes ABI or not. As said we should probably simply disable dns-crypt support for now.

build cycle issue is not clear now