From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Keir Fraser <keir@xensource.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] yet another package check (take 2)
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 09:49:35 +0000
Message-ID: <C1A8202F.6216%keir@xensource.com>
References: <20061215093325.GA1481@leeni.uk.xensource.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
In-Reply-To: <20061215093325.GA1481@leeni.uk.xensource.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: Ewan Mellor <ewan@xensource.com>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com>
Cc: Christoph Egger <Christoph.Egger@amd.com>, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 15/12/06 09:33, "Ewan Mellor" <ewan@xensource.com> wrote:

>> As I can't think of a smarter way, I think taking this change will depend on
>> whether it's acceptable to the majority to require all install prerequisites
>> to
>> be present on build-only machines,
> 
> That's certainly not acceptable.  We won't have the bridge-utils on our build
> boxes, for instance.

Perhaps we should have different behaviour between 'make install' and 'make
dist' in this respect? The latter shouldn't run install checks, certainly,
but arguably the former should.

Anyhow, I'll back out the changes to the Makefile for 3.0.4 (which means in
-unstable, for now) and we can revisit this argument for 3.0.5.

 -- Keir