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

Re: Introducing Build-Recommends / Build-Core-Depends?



On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 16:48:39 +0200
Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 2011-08-13 at 13:28:36 +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > During bootstraping a new architecture, there are sometimes ugly
> > build-dependency-loops (usually involving generating documentation
> > for the core build utilities means you need to have the architecture
> > already available; same with graphical tools). During DebConf, Wookey
> > had a talk which lead to us discussing some ideas how to support that.
> > Most packages are not affected at all by that, and current behaviour
> > isn't changing as long as package source files are not changed.
> > 
> > Below is my summary of the ideas - names et all are of course just
> > names and up to be changed. Advantage of this schema is that most
> > implementation is just package-local - the maintainer knows which
> > minimal versions his source package could produce, and just annotates
> > them. Coordination between different packages is not needed so much
> > anymore, and we could try to bring the build-dependencies more into a
> > tree-shape. Please see e.g.
> > http://meetings-archive.debian.net/pub/debian-meetings/2011/debconf11/low/745_Bootstrapable_Debian.ogv
> > for the talk.
> 
> During the Extremadura Embedded meeting in 2006 we discussed too these
> things, and I came up with the following proposals, which should be
> generic enough not only for bootstrapping but also for embedded type
> of reduced builds:
> 
>   <http://www.hadrons.org/~guillem/debian/docs/embedded.proposal>

Sounds like we need an Emdebian / FTP / Dpkg sprint in 2011/2012 to
finally decide on one of the many ideas, get it *implemented* and stop
going around the same loop with different names but the same objective.

There's nothing intrinsically wrong with the 2006 proposal, just like
there isn't that much wrong with Wookey's DebConf11 proposal and
Andreas' current nomenclature in this thread.

Can we please stop discussing / painting the bike shed, get together and
fix this for Wheezy? It's an ideal time when so many libraries are
being refreshed for MultiArch and the revolution in cross-building
which MultiArch itself can provide.

(Note: there won't be any point in a sprint unless Guillem & Raphael
are able to attend and this would also give a chance to sort out the
TDeb stalemate at the same time.)

Guillem - at DebConf11, our DPL pushed for more sprints. All that's
needed is the date of a long weekend which you and Raphael can be in
the same place. The venue will presumably be somewhere in France /
western Europe. Steve McIntyre & Neil McGovern stepped forward to
organise the event itself.

All the team need is a date when you, Guillem, & Raphael are both
available.

Just don't schedule it over the weekend of Steve McIntyre's wedding
(Sept 10th) or I will be in BIG trouble.
;-)

(Something in late October / November this year anyone?)

It'll be REALLY disappointing if this thread just results in yet more
discussion over semantics and nomenclature.

Debian is a do-ocracy, so 6 years of discussion really needs to end with
something actually being done.

-- 


Neil Williams
=============
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/

Attachment: pgp02HTzvKr8C.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: