Re: The use of Build-Depends: libc*-dev
On Sat, Nov 09, 2002 at 12:32:02AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 07:51:22PM +0100, Thomas Schoepf wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 11:01:40AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> > > The issue recently came up on IRC that many (many!) packages seem to have
> > > a Build-Depends: libc6-dev; so many, in fact, that it appears that the
> >
> > Why do they build-depend on libc*-dev anyway? There's no need for it.
>
> What about packages which really do depend on glibc and won't build with
> another libc? (One of the BSD ports is using its own libc, for example.)
I did not mean to say that packages should never declare such
dependencies. In case where certain dependencies are required to build
the package, it should be declared that way. Otherwise packages should
be as permissive as possible with regard to build dependencies, imho.
Thomas
--
Reply to: