On Sun, 28 Jul 2019 16:33:21 +0200, Johannes Schauer <josch@debian.org> wrote: > Quoting Mo Zhou (2019-07-28 16:03:43) > > On 2019-07-28 13:13, Ian Jackson wrote: > > > This is maybe not directly helpful to you right now, but: > > > > > > If we could build-depend on source packages, you could combine these > > > two ideas into something that might be less awful. > > More than once have I thought of "what if I can B-D on a source package". > > Is such demand common enough among developers? > > recently there was some discussion about this in #debian-apt. I don't have > the logs of that discussion so others might want to expand on what I > remember from back then. In no particular order plus my own thoughts. > > apt developers are in favour of such a feature but it would need > implementation in dpkg first. This means that dpkg would have to also track > "installed" (unpacked) source packages in /usr/src in a similar way of how > it currently tracks installed binary packages. > > Tons of software that parses the Build-Depends field has to be patched. At > least: dpkg, sbuild, apt, debhelper, cdbs, pbuilder, lintian, dose3, > wanna-build, dak, devscripts, python-debian, libconfig-model-perl, augeas, > haskell-debian, dh-exec, autopkgtest... Could we avoid (some of) this by treating “source” as a new architecture? There would be a mostly do-nothing buildd which would repack the source package as a binary package in /usr/src/... That would still mean we’d have to add meaningful arch-qualified build-dependencies in all the affected tools, and it doesn’t help with the transitive dependencies (although the binary package containing the source could carry the appropriate dependencies), so perhaps it’s not such a great idea. Regards, Stephen
Attachment:
pgpZr7cT1xtsf.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature