Re: Are build-dependancies mandatory?
firstname.lastname@example.org (Rahul Jain) writes:
> maybe there should be meta-packages for packages that have embedded version
> numbers like that.
In the general case, yes. In this case, there is no need for one, since the
package in question is build-essential, and so need not be listed in a build
I've run into a number of cases where the build dependency for some other
library that is not build-essential is tied to a specific version. It is hard
to tell quickly if those are "mistakes", or if the package really depends on
a particular version. So, for now, such packages get marked as 'failed' and
left to rot until/unless they are needed to fill some dependency...
> Or maybe the build-dep on libstdc++2.10-dev indicates that
> the package relies on some g++ brokenness ;)
Heh. That would be frightening. So far, the fix for all the packages I have
tried is to just ignore that build dependency and build against a current
version of libstdc++.