Re: Library packages depending on data files
On Fri, Feb 06, 2004 at 02:44:36PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> Moin Adrian!
> > That's similar to the situation with people demanding making it easy for
> > backporters:
> > Packages in unstable must be suitable for unstable. It's nice if the
> > maintainer makes backporting easy, but if it's hard to backport a
> > package that is only the problem of the person doing the backport and
> > not a fault of the maintainer.
> I can share only parts of your opinion. IMHO the best way would be to
> introduce different Build-Dependencies, since Build-Deps are often
> (mis)used to enforce transitions in Sid. There should be something like
> Build-Depends-Min where the maintainer specifies the really neccessary
> dependencies (eg. add gcc (>> 3) to Build-Deps and omit it in
Unless the maintainer backports himself, your suggested
Build-Depends-Min would often not be strict enough.
My experience with backporting is that even the normal build
dependencies are often not strict enough.
As a last point:
lintian lists 303 packages with
Consider that this is something lintian gives an error for, and that
this is at least technically RC.
This is current state of the normal build dependencies - do you assume
your suggested Build-Depends-Min were in a better state?
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed