Re: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?
Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de> writes:
> Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> writes:
>> I really don't think that declaring the majority of packages in Debian
>> buggy in this fashion is viable, particularly when nearly all packages
>> in Debian will not benefit from this. My guess is that something on
>> the order of 1% of packages have a meaningful distinction between
>> build-arch and build-indep, if that, but that includes some packages
>> that benefit a *lot*. Wouldn't it be better to only have to work on
>> modifying the packages that will specifically benefit instead of making
>> every other package maintainer in Debian add a new target that really
>> isn't meaningful for their package?
> Already 25% of all packages do have the targets and I assume a lot
> more than 1% to benefit.
I'd be curious to see your reasoning there.
All of my packages have build-arch and build-indep targets. None of them
benefit from them at all. I expect many other people have similarly added
the targets just because, or have the targets provided by a build system
such as CDBS, even though they don't benefit.
> Weigh that against the cost, adding a % to the build target or adding
> 'build-%: build', for the packages without meaningful distinction.
As many people have previously pointed out, that's not the real cost.
I really don't see any justification for forcing all packages to change
when we have a proposed solution that lets only the packages that benefit
change.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: