On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 08:12 -0400, Justin Pryzby wrote: > During the xlibs-dev transition, I learned that listing full > build-dependencies (not just the minimal set) is recommended, though I > don't know how widely accepted or followed this is. I don't mean > listing indirect build-deps, just the complete set of directly used > ones, even if one of the build-deps depends on another one. > devscript's dpkg-depcheck and dpkg-genbuilddeps may be useful. The basic idea is that if *your package* needs foo, then you must state foo - even if you also need bar which depends on foo. The reason for this is that you dont control the depends: of bar, so its quite possible for foo to stop being installed while your package builds without warning ... unless you have listed foo directly. That said, packages like gam and gam-dev are extremely unlikely to have that happen - I would tend to just build-dep on the -dev package there. Rob -- GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part