Re: Missing Build-Conflicts for non-clean build environments: RC? (was: Re: Bug#508947: Lowering severity)
On 2008-12-20, David Paleino <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> >trying to look at RC bugs, I just stumbled upon this one.
>> >IMHO it's not severity serious, since binary packages are built in clean
>> >chroots. Hence you don't have wx2.6 installed, but just the Build-Deps, =
>> >It's still "important", because it fails on non-clean chroots, i.e. when
>> >building on "normal" boxes.
>> I don't agree with your arguing. Serious is defined as "severe violation
>> of Debian policy (roughly, it violates a "must" or "required"
>> directive)". Debian policy 7.7 says:=20
>> |Build-Depends, Build-Conflicts
>> | The Build-Depends and Build-Conflicts fields must be satisfied when
>> |any of the following targets is invoked: build, clean, binary,
>> |binary-arch, build-arch, build-indep and binary-indep.
>> It does not mention a clean chroot. Afaik it also violates the policy if
>> a packages build in fully installed chroot ist linked against
>> more/different libraries than the same package build in a clean chroot.
Up to the etch release, I asked release people wether missing
build-dependencies was release critical. They said no.
I think I also have asked them in the last 6 months and got similar
answer, but I'm not as sure about that as it wasn't involving one of my
packages, but general rc bug work.