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

Re: Keeping information on the build system

Le Tue, Oct 16, 2001 at 09:43:35AM +0200, Yann Dirson écrit :
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 09:51:57PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > So it is better, IMHO, to assume the first situation than to store versions
> > of irrelevant packages, because it will make builds harder to reproduce.
> Yes, that's what I try to do :)

OK. I have compared my solution with your's in term of package list.

---- my solution get the list of packages installed to fullfill the build-deps
from the autobuilder

--- your solution compute all installed package that can be used to fulfill the

So in theory my solution give a smaller list.

In practice due to the way autobuilders work ( i.e. starting with only
build-essential packages and then adding a minimal set of packages to fulfill
the build-deps), the two solution will held the same result, always.

So I believe your solution is in pratice as good, and cleaner, so your solution
is better.

Still, I would like you allow a way for overriding it for human build,
when we can have several package installed that can fulfill the dependencies,
maybe interactively (output the list of possibility to fulfill the build-deps
and ask the human builder to choose).

It seem you ahve wrote a perl library to parse build-essential ?
I have a similar library in the new depcheck 

May be we should merge them?

Kind Regards,


Reply to: