Re: Bootstrappable Debian - proposal of needed changes
On 01/16/2013 08:56, Neil Williams wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jan 2013 00:26:53 +0100
Jakub Wilk <email@example.com> wrote:
Not only dpkg, but also wanna-build, sbuild, lintian, dak, and who knows
It's about which ones need to change. lintian response rates are not
likely to be a problem - once this gets approved. dak doesn't
necessarily need to do anything - most bootstrapping happens outside
the main archive to prepare the ground for a move into debian-ports.
Beyond that point, none of the bootstrapping support is required.
If you want to use new Build-Depends features for packages in the main
archive, dak needs patches too: "dak rm -R" will warn if Build-Depends
are broken by a package removal. So it needs to be able to understand
python-apt would need to support the field for the same reason. And we
would need the support in stable (or backports) for dak to use it.
sbuild can use a specified bootstrapping dependency resolver, e.g. the
one used to test the proposal itself. (As could pbuilder.)
And the official buildd network would need to use these before any
package using build profiles in Build-Depends could be uploaded to the