Re: possible MBF: automatically detecting unused build dependencies

[Johannes Schauer <j.schauer@email.de>]

Hi,

Quoting Henrique de Moraes Holschuh (2014-07-07 14:07:26)
> Please don't assume that the unused build dependency is always where the
> defect is.  Rather, the MBF text should account for the possibility that the
> unused build-dependency should have been used in the first place, but
> something is broken in the build and it is being left unused.

you are correct, this should be mentioned. Here the updated text:

--%<---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Maintainer,

the build dependencies $foo, $bar and $baz of this source package do not seem
to be needed. Neither are any of their files accessed during the build nor are
their dependencies on other binary packages required.

This can either mean that the build dependency is superfluous and should be
removed to make bootstrapping easier or it indicates a bug where a package
should be used but is in fact not. Please remove the build dependency from the
Build-Depends in the former case or fix the build procedure in the latter.

You can find more detail about the procedures that were used to find this
problem in the MBF announcement on debian-devel: $email

-->%---------------------------------------------------------------------------

thank you!

cheers, josch