Re: source dependencies - and recomndations
On %M %N, Joey Hess wrote
> 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.
let's use "Source-Depends: " and override that with
"Source-Depends-<arch>:" ok ? the first will do for most packages, and
with i386 specials like svgalib you have to list everything in -i386.
Note : you have to list everything in -arch. if -arch exist, the normal
Source-Depends is ignored.
ok ?
andreas
--
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: