Re: Evince backport proposal (2)
On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 10:53:12PM +0200, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> Sylvain Beucler wrote:
> > Btw, is it a problem that I need to switch debhelper back and forth?
> > Maybe I should add a debhelper (= 4) or (< 5) in evince as well?
> debhelper is backwarts compatible, if anybody sets anywhere a '(=
> $version)' depends to debhelper, he must be fucking stupid.
> normally, you [build] all packages with dh4, except where a) the
> package declares a dh5 build-depends, or b) the packages is broken
> and requires dh5 without declaring it (like libdjvulibre).
In the case of evince, building with dh5 adds a new dependency to
gconf2 (/usr/sbin/gconf-schemas, via dh_gconf) in postinst and prerm
hooks. I'd like to avoid backporting gconf2, hence why I suggest (=4).
This contradicts http://wiki.debian.org/Backports, but do you have a
cleaner way to do the trick? Producing a package that wouldn't be
perfectly auto-buildable sounds dirty :)