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

Re: Proposal, a Build-Depends-Optional field



Hi,

Quoting Gianfranco Costamagna (2015-05-25 09:22:57)
> I don't know how much is feasible and useful the field.
> 
> Problem: I have a package that might depend on a libfoo-dev
> library.
> 
> "might" because it tries to detect it at configure time,
> and if the libfoo is found some features are enabled, otherwise
> the features are disabled.
> 
> Since the libfoo isn't build on every architecture, I would like to
> have some field in my control file, like
> "try to install it, if not found just discard it", instead of keeping
> track of every architecture built or not at each upload and enable when a new
> architecture is successfully built.

This thread was also asking for a method to overcome the problem of keeping an
architecture list up to date:
http://lists.debian.org/20141211180858.GS2361@bivouac.eciton.net

One solution was proposed by Helmut:
http://lists.debian.org/20141217084500.GA16582@alf.mars

In your case this would mean that the source package building libfoo-dev would
modify the binary package libfoo-dev to Provides: optional-libfoo-dev and
additionally build a binary package called no-libfoo-dev on all architectures
where libfoo-dev is *not* built which also Provides: optional-libfoo-dev.
Lastly, let your source package build depend on optional-libfoo-dev.

This solution might have a slight advantage over the one one proposed by Jakub
by explicitly listing the package no-libfoo-dev in the Build-Environment field
in the .buildinfo file on architectures where your package is built without
libfoo-dev instead of just leaving it out.

cheers, josch

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: signature


Reply to: