[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: source dependencies - and recomndations



In article <[🔎] 19970730022907.16396@kite> you write:
>Bill Mitchell wrote:
>> It would seem, then, that Depends vs. Recommends split is not sufficiently
>> explicit.  The i386 autocompiler and the m68k aqutocompiler both need
>> their own explicit set of Depends entries.  Given that, and the policy
>> that the purpose of all of this is to make it clear how to build the
>> package as it was built for Debian, it seems that the need for Recommends
>> disappears.
>
>So you think we should have a Source-Depends-i386, Source-Depends-m68k, etc
>fields? I guess that would work. Though perhaps there should be a
>Source-Depends field that is used as default if Source-Depends-<arch> is not
>present, so we won't always have to add a new field to each package when a
>new architecture is added.

Another way would be to add architecture to the version comment, so that
you can say something like (this meaning of course depinding on libc and,
on i386, svgalib):

Source-Depends: libc (>= 6.0.0), svgalib (i386; >= 1.2.0)

Possibly an 'all except this archtecture' notation is needed as well.

/Anders

-- 
 -- Of course I'm crazy, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong.
Anders Hammarquist   |          This space          | iko@netg.se
NetGuide Scandinavia |   intentionally left blank   | Fax: +46 31 50 79 39
http://www.netg.se   |                              | Tel: +46 31 50 79 40


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .


Reply to: