Re: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?
Ian Jackson <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Russ Allbery writes ("Re: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?"):
>> Currently, policy says that it's recommended (the weakest policy
>> directive) to support noopt and nostrip. My main concern with
>> increasing the strength of that directive is that, depending on how
>> demented the upstream build system is, it can be difficult to support
>> these options, and since neither is used for regular builds in Debian,
>> they're not usually tested and aren't necessary for properly
>> functioning packages.
> Surely we are planning to support these options in all packages
> eventually ?
It is certainly not clear to me that we're planning on supporting nostrip
and noopt for all packages eventually.
> I'm tempted to suggest _just_ going by the package's Standards-Version.
Based on the arguments I've seen so far, I'm opposed to using the
package's Standards-Version for this purpose. I think it conflates
different meanings of that field and will get us into serious trouble when
it comes to the distinctions between must, should, and recommended.
Russ Allbery (email@example.com) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>