On Wed, 06 May 2009 18:39:32 +0200 Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org> wrote: > Le mercredi 06 mai 2009 à 17:35 +0100, Neil Williams a écrit : > > Should source packages need to build-depend on debug packages? > > When it is needed. > > > (See python-gtk2 for one example. python-all-dbg is small but > > python-numpy-dbg is 15Mb!) > > python-all-dbg brings python2.[45]-dbg, which makes 48 MB. :-( > > Just curious - is it only python packages that do this? > > If you want to build an extension for python-dbg, you need python-dbg > (which is a different interpreter). Is that so strange? It did strike me as unusual when working from a basis of autotools and C/C++ packages. If the -dbg package is more than just debugging symbols, should those other parts be in the -dev and leave the debugging symbols alone? Is that practical with python-all-dbg? I'm more used to seeing -dbg packages as only being useful at runtime, not on autobuilders. The context is Emdebian, where the Grip flavour is intended to be a native build environment, if only for individual packages, local packages and similar. Yes, -dev packages have a large installation requirement and building packages has a large temporary data requirement. It's just that adding -dbg packages to that mix did seem excessive. I'm assuming from your reply that it's only when building extensions to python itself that you'd need python-all-dbg rather than for "ordinary" python builds like GUI python applications? (I don't know enough about python builds.) Is python-gtk2 a different interpreter? -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/ http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/
Attachment:
pgpYGqEiA4iTG.pgp
Description: PGP signature