On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 02:05:55AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 10:58:33AM +0100, Sven Hoexter wrote: > > > while working on proftpd backport I've been stumbling about the fact > > that the proftpd package did not declare a build-dep on the libattr1-dev > > package. The package is clearly needed if you're going to build it by > > hand. I've been expecting the package to FTBFS on the buildds but the > > opposite happens and the pacakge is build correctly. > > > Reading #400738 and #405981 (which were both about this issue) didn't help > > me either to understand it. > > > Could someone please explain me why the buildds were able to build the package > > without explizitly knowing about the needed libattr1-dev build-dep? > > proftpd build-depends on libacl1-dev, which depends on libattr1-dev. And isn't it a good idea to declare a build-dep even in this case? proftpd would FTBS if libacl1-dev would drop its dependency on libattr1-dev. Is there a commonly accepted rule on these particular cases? Cheers, Julien
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature