Hi Fabian! Am Dienstag, den 10.02.2009, 13:25 +0100 schrieb Fabian Greffrath: > Steve Langasek schrieb: > > This is a very bad idea. It interferes with reproducibility of binary > > builds, which is a very important property of Debian packages. Packages > > must *not* build differently based on opportunistic discovery of > > build-dependencies on the system - it's a bug for any package to do so, let > > alone to be specifically encouraging this behavior with debian/control > > fields! > > Alright, this speaks clearly against Build-Recommends. However, would > you consider at least Build-Suggests useful enough to support them? If I got your proposal right, your use-case for Build-Suggests is that the package builds using additionally installed (development) packages, if they are already installed. A different method to achieve the same goal is to add a new option to DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS, in your case "nonfree-codecs" or something alike. You can check if it is set in debian/rules and change the build process accordingly to make use of the additional development packages. It has the drawback that you need to rely on the packages being installed already, so you may need to document it in README.Debian (or somewhere more appropriate) along with the option to pass in DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS but that's the same situation with your suggested Build-Suggests. (And as Neil pointed out, debian/rules should always behave in an "off" mode, meaning that the option only has an effect if it is set explicitely.) So all one needs to do to get the package with the non-free parts is to install the non-free -dev packages and do regular rebuild with DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS="nonfree-codes". That's easy enough, I think, and you do not need to modify the existing tools at all. Best regards Manuel
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil