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

Re: use flags? (was: Re: Introducing Build-Recommends / Build-Core-Depends?)

Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
>If we accept the idea there's now more than one way to build the
>package, I would like us do not limit the number of ways to '2' but
>rather extend the prospoal to set up something similar to Gentoo's USE
>flags. The advantages of that idea: 
>- porters/buildds/local administrators will have the greater flexibility
>  to choose what the want to (re)build;
>- for the architecture bootstrap this could be used for packages that
>  need to be rebuilt more than once with growing set of features
>  build-by-build (don't know if such packages exist).
>The disadvantage is obvious: harder to implement.
>I imagine it to look something like:
>Source: fbreader
>Build-Depends-Core: debhelper (>= 7), libbz2-dev
>Build-Depends-Qt3: libqt3-mt-dev
>Build-Depends-Qt4: libqt4-dev
>Build-Depends-Gtk2: libgtk2.0-dev
>Like in the original proposal, sets of build-depends are to be chosen by
>DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS, for example DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=use=gtk2,qt4. In
>absence of 'use' flag (i.e. by default), all 'optional' packages are
>built. And like in the original proposal, there's a header in the
>resulting .changes (and possibly in something else) which determines what
>was the value of the 'use' flag when building, like
>Built-With: gtk2,qt4.
>For the compatibility, dpkg-genchanges would combine all Build-Depends-*
>to a single Build-Depends.

I can see this turning into a large mess. What's the benefit for
Debian for all the extra work here? If you want massively differing
builds on every machine, Gentoo exists already...

Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.                                steve@einval.com
"...In the UNIX world, people tend to interpret `non-technical user'
 as meaning someone who's only ever written one device driver." -- Daniel Pead

Reply to: