Re: serious bugs because of missing build depends
On Sun, Feb 25, 2001 at 02:15:00AM +0000, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 25, 2001 at 02:46:13AM +0100, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > some of you have filed serious bugs against packages that have no
> > Build-Depends at all.
> >
> > According to Policy Section 2.4.2. Package relationships
> > Build-Depends only SHOULD be defined, Section 7 says the MAY
> > be defined.
> > [...]
> > For packages with Standards-Version below 3.1 such bugs should be wishlist
> > (wish to upgrade to a new Standards-Version and include Build-Depends)
> > because those policy versions did not define Build-Depends at all.
>
> No, just because the Standards-Version is <3.1 does not mean that the
> package is exempt from current policy.
>
> However, until it becomes a MUST, we should certainly not submit mass
> bug reports. In the meantime, perhaps lintian should warn if there is
> no Build-Depends(-Indep) line, seeing that most packages will need one
> (for debhelper, if nothing else).
Hmm. I feel I've missed something here. How does debhelper need/use
them?
I feel this is a problem with debian; getting all the information the
developers need to know to the developers. Maybe there should be a
developer's news a bit like DWN which summarises significant policy
changes but also things like new tools (new version of apt/debhelper,
and how they will make life better).
While I'm on the subject: I don't really want to track sid, since it
is a little too dangerous. I could track sid in a chroot, but my
preferred solution is to track sid only for the depends and
build-depends of the packages I maintain (since it's important they
are built against the latest libraries etc.). It would be nice to have
apt-get install deps-and-build-deps-of-<foo> to get the sid versions -
is there a tool for this?
Jules
Reply to: