[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Is debhelper build-essential?



Le jeudi 13 janvier 2005 à 12:49 +0100, Santiago Vila a écrit :
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2005, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> 
> > The stats:
> > 
> >   8,920  source packages in Debian unstable main.
> >   8,254  declare a build-dependency on debhelper
> > 
> >   = 92% of packages build-depend on debhelper.
> > 
> > Is that sufficient to declare it build-essential?
> 
> No, it's not by definition, as you don't *need* it for a simple
> "hello, world" package written in C. The fact that there are policy
> compliant packages in the archive not using debhelper is the most
> simple proof that it's not build-essential.

So what? You don't need g++ for a simple hello world package in C,
however g++ is build-essential. You don't even need gcc for a simple
package containing data files. Following your line of reasoning, only
make and dpkg-dev should be build-essential.

> Don't confuse build-essential with build-popular.

Why?
-- 
 .''`.           Josselin Mouette        /\./\
: :' :           josselin.mouette@ens-lyon.org
`. `'                        joss@debian.org
  `-  Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=


Reply to: