Re: Semi-contrib packages
Nicolas Boullis wrote:
Right, but it seems policy does not allow a contrib source package to
put binaries in both contrib and main. It's a policy issue, not a
technical one: if a package is "tainted" with a non-free build-dep or
dep for a single binary package on a single arch, then the whole thing
is thrown into contrib.
On Sat, Nov 24, 2001 at 09:49:29PM -0500, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
Right, thanks for pointing this out (I need to RTFP :-). So the source
would become contrib, because some of the binaries would need contrib
software to build on one platform. But then, can I put the
gcc/g77-built binaries in main? Hmm, doubtful.
Can I "Build-Depends: ccc [alpha], cfal [alpha]" and still have the
source package in main?
No, that would violate policy (2.1.2).
Of course you can.
gcc/g77 does not require any non-free software. They require a C
compiler, but any C compiler, including gcc itself (for example a
previous version). And for the bootsatraping problem on a given
architecture, it's still possible to use a cross-compiler on another
And I've decided it's not worth duplicating the source package for
faster performance on this one arch, I've put enough work into the
package so that it's trivial for a user to build his/her own .debs with
the non-free compilers/libs. (Haven't tested gcc-3.0 yet, it's very
possible the performance difference bet ccc/cfal and gcc/g77-3.0 will be
a lot narrower than vs. gcc/g77-2.95.)
GPG fingerprint: D54D 1AEE B11C CE9B A02B C5DD 526F 01E8 564E E4B6
Welcome to the best software in the world today cafe!