|| On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 22:54:41 +0200 (CEST) || Andreas Tille <tillea@rki.de> wrote: at> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Otavio Salvador wrote: >> cdd-dev is a binary package and this doesn't build-depends of any >> package. at> Sure, but it should prepare a ready to run debian/control file for at> *all* CDDs to keep necessary editing as low as possible for at> meta package builders. If the CDD meta package source needs different at> Build dependencies you will have to do extra editing and research at> which is not really hard but breaks the consistency. Yes. cdd-dev is to help to build meta-packages but this doesn't force to the built packages have the same build-deps of cdd source packages. The only build-deps NEEDED to use cdd-dev is cdd-dev itself. How cdd-dev is built and what this need is not user busines, IMHO. >> If some maintainer what to *use* cdd-dev this does't need your your >> build-deps installed, only deps. Your packages then will build-depend >> of cdd-dev and of one doc tool, if need. >> >> This is what I see. Is wrong? at> Your arguing is not wrongf but as I said I would love if the control at> file looks always the same with only one exception: The CDD name. at> all further differences should be kept out. As I've said I thought at> about including the <cdd>-doc package into the meta-package building at> source package but currently I'm not convinced that it is worth doing at> it at the price of loosing consistency. So you want cdd source itself looks like the package built to use cdd-dev? it? -- O T A V I O S A L V A D O R --------------------------------------------- E-mail: otavio@debian.org UIN: 5906116 GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855 Home Page: http://www.freedom.ind.br/otavio --------------------------------------------- "Microsoft gives you Windows ... Linux gives you the whole house."
Attachment:
pgp6nhPs98QH1.pgp
Description: PGP signature