Hi, Am Montag, den 20.07.2009, 17:48 -0300 schrieb Marco Túlio Gontijo e Silva: > Em Mon, 20 Jul 2009 15:30:04 +0200 > Joachim Breitner <nomeata@debian.org> escreveu: > (...) > > haskell-devscripts, by default, build docs with hscolour. At the moment, > > every package needs a Build-Dependency on hscolour, despite actually > > mentioning it anywhere. Woudn’t it make more sense to have > > haskell-devscripts depend on hscolour? > > Isn't it the same with gch6, ghc6-prof, ghc6-doc and haddock? Should all of > them be a dependency? Hmm. Actually, yes :-) (I thought of hscolour first because that’s lacking as a build-dependency on a lot of packages). This is actually a neat idea to avoid the sourceful uploads that I mentioned in my last mail: If the upcoming haskell-devscripts that will move haddock files to -dev would depend on these five packages, it is no problem if some haskell-* packages still list them as B-D-I, as they have haddock as a B-D. Greetings, Joachim -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner Debian Developer nomeata@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C JID: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil