[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: build dependency alternatives sequencing


On Sun, Sep 09, 2001 at 11:16:50AM -0600, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> However, the sbuild tool that
> most Debian autobuilders are using will only try the first alternative without
> manual intervention.  The tool probably can and should be augmented to handle
> the full Build-Depends syntax, but while doing so would increase our build
> percentages slightly, it would also mask what may be some underlying problems.

While I agree with the masking problems comment, there's at least one
situation where it really should be enhanced IMHO. That's the case where the
dependency it picks (the first one, in the current situation) simply is not
available. I don't think there's any reasonable excuse for bailing out in
that situation.

> There are a couple of other oddball cases, like 
>         svgalibg1-dev | svgalib-dummyg1
> where svgalib isn't relevant for all architectures.

This is exactly one of the situations where the problem I described above
would occur. While moving the dependencies around would probably help in
nearly all cases [1], this would also really only be masking up the buildd



[1] only exception I can think of is someone who maintains a package that
    can use svgalib and who doesn't have access to i386 easily to build
    himself - and granted, that's not very likely a case to happen.

War does not prove who is right, it proves who is left.

Attachment: pgp3mjy6PHVPV.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: