Re: Packages removed from frozen
>>"Anthony" == Anthony Towns <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
Anthony> Packages that inherently can't be built that way, should
Anthony> obviously just be packaged, with a circular
Anthony> build-dependency, and ideally a README.Porters or something
Anthony> to help new dists get the package ported.
Anthony> I don't see where special dispensation comes into it though.
The special dispensation is a mechanism I was attempting to
borrow from the virtual package file: when you need a virtual
package, you ask on -policy, and the package you name is added to the
virtual package file.
Asking for dispensation for circular build depends was
(perhaps a poor) attempt to ensure that people don't just declare a
self build depends out of sloth; and to ensure that the packages
properly get marked as potentially dangerous
We do need some mechanism where the circular build
dependencies, at least the short looped ones, are recorded, not just
for porters, but for the extremely security conscious. This is
espescially true for compilers (which has been the overwhelming
example of a class of package that reuires a circular dependency).
I must have a prodigious quantity of mind; it takes me as much as a
week sometimes to make it up. Mark Twain, "The Innocents Abroad"
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C