On Tue, 07 Jun 2011 11:34:30 +0200 Vincent Danjean <vdanjean.ml@free.fr> wrote: > > A few days ago, we had a discussion about a packaging-dev meta package. > > The responses were between neutral and positive. Therefore I created a > > initial draft [1] and tried to incorporate all suggestions made in the > > discussion. > > > > The list looks currently like this: > > > > Depends: [...] > > pbuilder | cowbuilder | sbuild, > > My laptop, where I do all my packaging work but final build, has > none of them installed. I've a separate machine with several chroots > (lenny, squeeze, unstable and several for ubuntu) managed with sbuild that > I use when I want to really build the package I will upload. Due to disk > space, I cannot instal them (chroots) on my laptop. > I other people work like me, these tools can be moved to Recommends I disagree. pbuilder or the alternatives are fundamental to best practice Debian packaging. The needs of Debian are wider than a single user having a problem with a single machine. This package is trying to express best practice for packaging, to get a baseline. You admit that you have a way of building in a chroot and it isn't required that everyone uploading to Debian has this package installed, it is simply a way of making it simple for most people to have a standard set of build tools. Most people would have space for a pbuilder chroot (it's only a few hundred megabytes even unpacked, it's the apt cache which takes up the space and that can be cleared with a configuration change) and everyone using packaging-dev should be expected (required) to use a chroot to build packages prior to upload. Recommending chroot build tools is not strong enough. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgpVw4559D7yw.pgp
Description: PGP signature