Re: Building a package for experimental
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 06:02:19PM +0200, Tobias Toedter <toddy@debian.org> wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I'm thinking about building one of my packages with a new feature enabled and
> would therefore prefer to upload to experimental instead of unstable.
>
> However, although I looked into the Developer's Reference and into Policy, I
> could not find an answer to the following question. Since experimental is not
> a full distribution, how should packages be built for experimental? Should I
> use pbuilder with unstable, but upload to experimental? That would have the
> advantage that users willing to test the new package can just install the
> package into their unstable distribution, without needing to pull in
> libraries which might have a newer version in experimental.
>
> The other option would be of course to use pbuilder with experimental and
> upload to experimental, so that the package gets linked with available
> experimental libraries as well -- that seems to be the cleaner approach to
> me.
>
> How are other people handling this?
What I usually do is that I build my experimental packages against unstable,
except if they *need* versions of some packages from experimental, in which
case I take these.
For example, current xulrunner in experimental is built against unstable
build dependencies ; earlier, it needed cairo from experimental, in which
case that was the only package from experimental I used at build time.
Current iceweasel in experimental requires xulrunner from experimental,
so, obviously, I build against it ;)
Cheers,
Mike
Reply to: