Re: Requesting advice on build dependencies
On Sat, Aug 11, 2001 at 09:01:47PM -0400, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> Now, as I see it, I have several options here:
>
> (a) Build-Depend unconditionally on both ggi and sdl, but add architecture
> tags specifying which archs the dependency applies to. This is ugly, since
> I have to constantly keep track of which architectures ggi and sdl are
> working on this week.
This is annoying, but it is what several other packages must do. If all else
fails, do this. You can minimize the maintenance headache by only excluding
architectures where GGI and/or SDL are known not to exist. If the situation
changes, and someone cares enough about the package, a bug will be filed to
notify you to update the dependencies.
> (c) ...do something else?
>
> I'd like to keep the ability to install both versions if possible, but
> I definitely do NOT want to do (a), and the GGI version isn't that critical.
> (note: this is also a good time to scream bloody murder if you want me to
> keep the GGI compile :-) )
Another option is to split the source package into two, mostly identical except
for control and rules. One build-depends on SDL, the other on GGI. Each will
be built on whichever platforms are appropriate.
I think what would elegantly solve this problem would be a notion of an
optional build dependency, which would be installed by the autobuilders if it
is available, but if it is not, the build could continue successfully.
--
- mdz
Reply to: