Re: Keeping information on the build system
On Thu, Oct 11, 2001 at 09:05:57PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> I like this idea.
Cool :)
> As we allow alternative build depends, it may be important to keep track of
> which packages and version has been really used in the build process,
> especially when it is done by autobuilders.
Currently the script lists all the packages in an alternative which
were found on the system - or if it doesn't I just missed something in
the dpkg-checkbuilddeps control structures and it should be fixes - it
is possible that only the 1st package from an alternative found ont
the system gets recorded, I'll have to check.
At least for virtual packages it lists all providers currently
installed - which causes some sort of redundancy in the listing, but
it's not urgent to fix that ;)
> Also sometime it is useful to bypass build-depends:
> configure scripts may add optional libraries if they find them.
> If the builder does not provide them, the package will not have
> the optional capability. It is nice to keep track of it inside
> the package.
I think this should be taken into account by Build-Depends and
Build-Conflicts, or we're missing something in the reproducibility
field anyway. Or do I miss your point ?
> I am not sure "recursive" build-depends being useful, because they
> often loop,
That's not a problem, we can always break out of the loop.
> and are not reproducible in practice.
Between different versions of the explicit build-deps you mean ?
Well, yes. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this should be addressed by
my intent of listing indirect deps separately from direct ones.
> The version of the build-depended version should be sufficient in
> practice, because we can download them to reproduce the build.
Not always. Unfortunately we do not keep all versions of everything.
Your point may have been valid for stable releases, which are archived
everywhere, and even then, you can find in a stable release a package
which was build using, say, package A, which at that time depended on
B, but for some reason the version of A currently in stable does not
depend any more on B, this only occured in the unstable/testing phase.
This will only be possible when/if we put the whole dist under CVS or
such, which is not likely in the near future.
--
Yann Dirson <ydirson@altern.org> | Why make M$-Bill richer & richer ?
Debian-related: <dirson@debian.org> | Support Debian GNU/Linux:
Pro: <yann.dirson@fr.alcove.com> | Freedom, Power, Stability, Gratuity
http://ydirson.free.fr/ | Check <http://www.debian.org/>
Reply to: