On Sat, Dec 20, 2003 at 11:04:26AM +1100, Brian May wrote: > On Fri, Dec 19, 2003 at 08:53:35PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote: > > People just don't realize that using Build-Depends-Indep instead of > > Build-Depends for a binary-all package is useless. - There are no > > benefits, just the possibility to introduce the bug we are talking > > about. > > So what is the purpose of Build-Depends-Indep? The purpose of Build-Depends-Indep is to contain packages that need _not_ be installed on to build arch-dependent packages. There is a common misconception that "Build-Depends-Indep" is the opposite of "Build-Depends". It is not; it is the opposite of a nonexistant "Build-Depends-Arch" or something similar. "Build-Depends" should only contain that which is used in *both* binary-arch and binary-indep. > (I am guessing from this thread either I have misunderstood it > and/or policy has changed). Perhaps policy should be reworded or clarified (again). I gave it a shot a few months ago, but apparently it's still not clear enough. I've got an idea that might kill misconceptions once and for all. I'll polish it a bit, and send a proposal to -policy. -- Wouter Verhelst Debian GNU/Linux -- http://www.debian.org Nederlandstalige Linux-documentatie -- http://nl.linux.org "Stop breathing down my neck." "My breathing is merely a simulation." "So is my neck, stop it anyway!" -- Voyager's EMH versus the Prometheus' EMH, stardate 51462.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature