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

Bug#745656: marked as done (are binary-indep -dev packages really worth the space savings?)

Your message dated Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:09:46 +0200
with message-id <1ca5332ecc18afa1b6e0294cd0c52af09f91a46e.camel@43-1.org>
and subject line Re: are binary-indep -dev packages really worth the space savings?
has caused the Debian Bug report #745656,
regarding are binary-indep -dev packages really worth the space savings?
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
745656: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=745656
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: general
Severity: important

looking at recent GCC uploads, I see install ability problems for the build
dependencies for GCC packages (triggered by libgcj build dependencies, gtk+2.0).
 I can't think of any value besides some minor space savings to have -dev
packages to be architecture independent.   If you really need some newer -dev
version you should be able to do this with an updated build dependency.

A source upload for a library always requires a rebuild on any architecture, so
there is no buildd time savings to make the -dev package architecture independent.

So why are people trying to optimize for space instead of turn-around-time?

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Wed, 23 Apr 2014 22:03:12 +0200 Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> wrote:
> looking at recent GCC uploads, I see install ability problems for the build
> dependencies for GCC packages (triggered by libgcj build dependencies, gtk+2.0).
>  I can't think of any value besides some minor space savings to have -dev
> packages to be architecture independent.   If you really need some newer -dev
> version you should be able to do this with an updated build dependency.
> 
> A source upload for a library always requires a rebuild on any architecture, so
> there is no buildd time savings to make the -dev package architecture independent.
> 
> So why are people trying to optimize for space instead of turn-around-time?

There was no further discussion and no action asked for.  If you want
to propose to no longer have arch-indep -dev packages, that is probably
something for debian-policy.

Ansgar

--- End Message ---
Reply to: