Should libc5 Versions be build when no libc5 is present?
The story is as follows:
I tried to build lesstif without having libc5 installed at all. The
package then refused to build at all. The maintainer means that its
not a bug but a needed feature to ensure that upload will also contain
libc5 Versions of the Package.
The problem is probably the same for most libs, so I ask here what the
gerneral opinion is in such a case.
My opinion is that such a package should test what libc's are install
and build the respective versions. The package might and probably
should display a big warning that only this and that version will be
build instead of a complete build.
Maintainers doing uploads, esspecially of libs, will most likely have
both libc's installed and thus thei will build both versions
anyway. The chance of a partial upload of only one version should thus
be near nil. The fat warning given when a lib is missing should be
enough to ensure the correct build for an upload.
Users will only have one lib installed and they will only want one
Version of the packages they build. They don't upload packages, they
just want to use them. Building of packages is a quite common thing
even for users. (Downloading the source and respective diffs is faster
and cheaper.)
Having the package decide smartly what libc versions to build wouldm
make both sides happy, whereas forcing a build of both versions forces
the users (and maintainers that don't want libc5) to use libc5.
So whats the general opinion about it?
May the Source be with you.
Mrvn
PS: Do you remeber libc4, should we build libc4 versions also? :)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: