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

Re: Consistent handling of the DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS

On Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 08:32:20PM +0000, Neil Williams wrote:

> OK - as long as the one option always has the same meaning. A package
> that builds libfoo-doc needs to drop the -doc content AND the
> manpages, changelog, README, AUTHORS etc., from all packages and not
> just the "docs". I realise that this may mean that the -doc or -data,
> -common package becomes all but empty. That is what we need for
> Emdebian - packages that contain the essential binary and virtually
> nothing else.

I wonder if this is the wrong approach. You want to add extra complexity
to _every_ package for the benefit of only a small user base. Instead,
why not patch "dpkg-deb -b" in Emdebian to interpret -nodoc as "leave
out everything under /usr/share/doc when building a package"? This
change is much smaller, much more targetted, and works even if some
developers decide they do not want to bloat their packaging just because
of Emdebian.

> A subsequent round of changes may be able to support dropping
> dependencies on -data or -common packages when the package is all but
> meaningless with such a meaning for -nodocs.

Huh? If the package is usable without the -data or -common package then
the Depends: is already a bug and should be removed or changed to a
Recommends:. If the package is not usable without the -data or -common
then that will not change even if the documentation is removed.


     MTA SZTAKI Computer and Automation Research Institute
                Hungarian Academy of Sciences

Reply to: