Re: Circular Build-Depends; am I their only enemy?
* Joel Baker (email@example.com) [031102 01:25]:
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 08:53:26PM -0500, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> > Yes, I know about README.Build in cdbs. Thanks, Colin! Perhaps a
> > Build-Recommends field could be added, which would be treated just like
> > a Build-Depends by the autobuilders, but would at least provide a
> > standardized way to clue people in that that package will build fine
> > without those (but at the possible loss of documentation, etc.)
> I like this solution. In fact, I like it a lot. (Of course, I also like
> the concept that Debian main in stable and testing should be closed sets,
> in terms of build-dependancies). I'd love to see a Build-Recommends for,
> say, texinfo or emacs (yes, we have things that Build-Depend on emacs...)
> if all they're being used for is documentation that *should* be there in an
> official package going to ftp-master, but which isn't crucial to skip if
> you're, say, building it solely to be able to build emacs...
Ack. This is a _really_ good idea.
PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C