Re: Is debhelper build-essential?
Anthony Towns <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Anthony Towns wrote:
>> 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?
>> Also of interest is that some 1300 packages would no longer need to
>> declare a Build-Depends: at all with those changes, and another 1200
>> wouldn't need to declare a Build-Depends-Indep:.
> Oh, also:
> Having the current debhelper be build-essential would fix the ~237
> bugs lintian finds for build-deps on debhelper that should be
> versioned, but aren't.
Aren't they (most) bogus anyway since the stable debhelper version is
new enough already?