Re: Bug#383481: Must source code be easy to understand to fall under DFSG?
On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 12:55:45AM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 23:59:18 +0100 Sven Luther wrote:
> > Nope, because you can ship the source code and the object file if you
> > wanted.
> > Already now, major parts of debian/main are not cleanly buildable out
> > of the box, due to cyclic bootstraping dependencies.
> But those major parts of debian/main are cleanly buildable using an
> already functioning installation of debian/main, aren't they?
No, not always.
> At least I *hope* those major parts are buildable using only packages
> from debian/main, otherwise they would Build-Depend on out-of-main
> components, which is a Policy violation for a package in main, AFAIK.
Well, It is not so much that you have to depend on out-of-main components, but
that you have to hand-build some of them and stop in the middle and stuff like
> If what I have just said is true and confirmed, then *that* is the
> difference: one thing is having cyclic bootstrapping dependencies that
> make an already compiled and installed system necessary, a completely
> different beast is something that needs an out-of-main compiler in order
> to be compiled...
Well, the cross compiler would be built from the same gcc source in main.
There is just no binary package provided for those.
> Or am I completely off track?!?
Not completely, but a bit yes.