Re: Is debhelper build-essential?

[Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de>]

Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:

> Anthony Towns wrote:
>> Scott James Remnant wrote:
>>
>>> The stats:
>>>   8,920  source packages in Debian unstable main.
>>>   8,254  declare a build-dependency on debhelper
>>>   = 92% of packages build-depend on debhelper.
>>> Is that sufficient to declare it build-essential?
>> Also of interest is that some 1300 packages would no longer need to
>> declare a Build-Depends: at all with those changes, and another 1200
>> wouldn't need to declare a Build-Depends-Indep:.
>
> Oh, also:
>
> http://lintian.debian.org/reports/Tpackage-lacks-versioned-build-depends-on-debhelper.html
>
> Having the current debhelper be build-essential would fix the ~237
> bugs lintian finds for build-deps on debhelper that should be
> versioned, but aren't.

Aren't they (most) bogus anyway since the stable debhelper version is
new enough already?

> Cheers,
> aj

MfG
        Goswin