Re: should automake1.6 "provide" automake?
On Sun, Jun 23, 2002 at 12:34:21PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> "Steve M. Robbins" <steven.robbins@videotron.ca> immo vero scripsit:
>
> > Providing "automake" is not a problem with the "official buildd"
> > software and any bugs so induced (which would have been induced with
> > automake1.5 last October) can be fixed with a change to
> > debian/control. Thus Junichi's worry, while valid, strikes me
> > personally as minor.
>
> Build-Depends is not only for the official-buildd.
I understand that. What I am saying is that we have two competing
interests for the package relationships, namely (1) being useful
to the user, and (2) being useful to the automated rebuilder. In
the case of automake, these interests are in something of a conflict
so there is a judgement call to be made. I'm not trying to belittle
interest #2.
> The main problem is that since the last the this debate took place,
> there still are many packages which build-depend on automake.
> [...] Otherwise we will never be able to drop automake 1.4 from
> the distribution
Though I would not morn its passing, I'm not arguing for removal of
automake 1.4. That is quite a separate issue.
Cheers,
-Steve
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: