Re: Bug#70269: automatic build fails for potato
On 31-Aug-00, 12:43 (CDT), Julian Gilbey <J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2000 at 08:29:30PM +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> > > > Which is just a stupid pain in the ass. I had to track through three
> > > > different references and finally install the "build-depends" package to
> > > > find out what I could leave out of by "Build-Depends" stanza. It would
> > > > *much* easier for developers, if less ideologically pure, to just list
> > > > the damn packages on the Developers Corner part of the website.
> > >
> > > Could we add this as a footnote to the relevant section in policy or
> > > the packaging manual (can't remember which offhand)?
> > Um, the current note in policy manual is not sufficient? (It explicitly
> > mentions the package "build-essential".)
> I guess. Maybe he didn't look in the right place ;-)
That would be cute if "the right place" wasn't so fucking hard to
find. The policy manual says look in build-essential. The control
file for Build-essential says look in policy manual, and includes two
different list files, one of which is completely pointless, the other of
which has the needed info buried in the middle of a bunch of definitions
and syntax. This is all needless run-around. Just put the list on the
website, and in the policy manual as a footnote. I *understand* that the
list is not the "official definition". Feel free to post the official
definition, and the say "the current list x, y, and z. But stop making
people spend 15 minutes hunting for information that should be listed
everywhere that that "build-depends" is mentioned.
Why are people determined to make information so hard to find?
Steve Greenland <firstname.lastname@example.org>
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org