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

Re: packaging-dev meta package



Am Donnerstag, den 26.05.2011, 22:40 +0200 schrieb gregor herrmann:
> On Thu, 26 May 2011 22:05:42 +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote:
> 
> > As a starting point packaging-dev would depend on
> > 
> > build-essential
> > quilt
> > debhelper
> > cmake
> > autoconf
> > cdbs
> > bzr-builddeb
> > apt-file
> > ubuntu-dev-tools (only on Ubuntu systems)
> > 
> > Do you like the idea or not? Do you have a better name for the meta
> > package? Should something added to or removed from the dependency list?
> 
> I tentatively think the idea is good; I don't really care about the
> name :)
> 
> The problem might be that the set of packages is not
> trivial/uncontroversial; I'm not sure I need cdbs (or cmake), I've
> never heard about bzr-builddeb, I miss cowbuilder (and also
> svn-buildpackage and git-buildpackage, and maybe dh-make) ... So yes,
> the idea is interesting, but the selection of packages might need
> some consideration :)

Then let's put the uncontroversial into Depends, the common (this needs
discussion) into Recommends and the others into Suggests.

Here's the starting point for discussion:

Depends:
build-essential
debhelper
devscripts
gnupg
lintian
dput | dupload
quilt
ubuntu-dev-tools (only on Ubuntu)
pbuilder | cowbuilder

Recommends:
apt-file
autoconf
bzr-builddeb (maybe Depends on Ubuntu)
svn-buildpackage
git-buildpackage
dh-make

Recommends or Suggests:
cdbs
cmake

-- 
Benjamin Drung
Debian & Ubuntu Developer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: