Re: Need advice before making about a dozen FTBFS bug reports (Was Re: pbuilder running...)
On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 01:13:38AM +0200, Samuli Suonpaa wrote:
> Adam Majer <adamm@galacticasoftware.com> writes:
> > NOTE: I've only mirrored /pool for sources. But a few packages
> > already failed because their sources are still in /dist under
> > potato... Will these ever get moved to pool?
>
> From this I got an inspiration to try building all the packages that
> currently reside under /dist/potato. Of these packages, total of 19
> (13 in main, 6 in non-free) failed to build, mostly due to missing
> build dependencies.
If there are no build-dependencies at all, then they fall under
bootstrapping rules we used when build-dependencies were being
introduced. There's a centralized list
(http://buildd.debian.org/andrea/) of the build-dependencies that should
be used for those packages.
> If I understand correctly, source dependencies were introduced at
> policy 3.1.0. Most of these packages, state Standards-Version 3.0.x or
> older. Should I still file a bug if I am not able to build to build
> the package without installing packages not mentioned in
> Build-Depends?
It might be helpful to file wishlist (or maybe normal, given how long
build-deps have been around) bugs with patches to add build-deps to
those packages.
> Should this be considered as a mass bug report and should I therefore
> use maintonly instead of submit?
For 19 bugs I would use maintonly, yes.
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: