Bug#886238: Build-Profiles purpose, mechanism vs policy (was Re: Bug#886238: Please introduce official nosystemd build profile)
On 10/01/18 01:29, Sam Hartman wrote:
> A build profile seems like a great way to express the flag, and like
> many things in Debian, the work would fall on those who would benefit
> from it.
I think it'd be better to be able to mark a build-dependency as optional, and
then implement a mechanism in dpkg to disable the undesired build-dependencies.
E.g. if packages start marking libselinux-dev as <optional>, with autoconf or
similar automatically disabling selinux support when not present, then a user
could build the package with something like dpkg-buildpackage
--disable-optional=libselinux-dev. This way we don't need a different build
profile for each build-dep and package, which would end up in a mess. Of course
we need to change the above syntax to not clash with build profiles, and add
DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS support, but you get the point I hope. Seems a lot more
standard to me than having each package define its own profiles for each
optional dependency.
Cheers,
Emilio
Reply to: