On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 07:03:55PM +0100, Mehdi Dogguy wrote: > On 12/13/2011 01:23 PM, Thomas Koch wrote: > > So is it ok to ship binaries in the source package that are only > > required during build? Can I do the same with simple-build-tool, > > which requires itself to build? > Depends on the need. It is quite common for compilers to have some > binaries to do the bootstrapping. Scala uses that since some parts of > the compiler are written in scala. And, of course, I make sure that I > ship new binaries only in the Debian package. Another example is OCaml > which needs an ocamlc to bootstrap itself. I think the traditional expectation here is that compilers will do their initial bootstrap using an out-of-archive binary, and that once in the archive, they'll be maintained using a self-build-depends instead. Shipping no-longer-needed bootstrap binaries in the source package is a borderline case. It's probably ok if we have the source needed to build that binary. But we ought not need to use it for the actual package build. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature