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

Re: suggestion: build-blockers field in control file

On Wed, 30 Nov 2011, peter green <plugwash@p10link.net> wrote:
> Some packages have runtime dependencies on packages that they do not
> have corresponding build-dependencies for. This leads to the building of
> uninstallable packages which in turn leads to problems with testing
> transition of packages.
> Currently there are two workarounds for this situation
> 1: manually alter the package's architecture list to limit building to
> those architectures where runtime dependencis
> 2: add an artificial build-dependency

Why are such things required?

Why not have software which wants to have the dependencies of a package look 
at the dependencies line as well as the build-dependencies?

It seems to me that the package maintainers are already providing the 
necessary information and the people who maintain autobuilder systems just 
need to use it.

I can't imagine that changing lots of packages and keeping track of new 
packages with similar issues would take less work than changing an 
autobuilder.  I also can't imagine that changing lots of packages would be as 

My Main Blog         http://etbe.coker.com.au/
My Documents Blog    http://doc.coker.com.au/

Reply to: