Re: Proposal: Making Debian compiler agnostic
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Paul Tagliamonte <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> If a package fails to build with an alternate compiler (that is, it
>> correctly *uses* the compiler, but the compiler reports a fatal error),
>> is that considered a bug, and what severity does it have?
> I'd not consider a FTBFS with a non-critical compiler to be too high of
> a severity, likely not RC. In fact, I'd likely only file a bug if the
> issue is with the Debian packaging -- e.g. hardcoding CC or CXX in
> d/rules or so, when the package builds fine without gcc otherwise.
The usage of the term "must" and "shall" in the policy wording would
have the effect of making any such issues RC since those would become
policy violations. Switching the the terms to "should" would probably
Hardcoded usage of CC or CXX (for example, CC=gcc) should be avoid and
documented if necessary.
Debian build tools _should_ respect the CC and CXX variables if provided. If
not, they _should_ default to /usr/bin/cc and /usr/bin/c++