Re: Versionned dependancies on build-essential packages. (was: Re: Where did Bacula 1.38.11-7+b1 come from?)
On 2007-02-24 Charles Plessy <charles-debian-nospam@plessy.org> wrote:
> Le Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 07:30:38PM +0100, Andreas Metzler a écrit :
> > Build-Depends: dpkg-dev (>=1.13.19)
[...]
> [Thread from -devel diverted to -mentors.]
I do not follow that list, thanks for the cc.
> I was just wondering the reason why the build-dependancy on dpkg-dev is
> necessary. Dpkg-dev is build-essential and is > 1.13.19 in unstable and
> testing anyway. Couldn't this be safely omitted when uploading for
> unstable ?
It is indeed not necessary for unstable, but it makes a backporter's
work more easy.
cu andreas
--
`What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are
so grateful to you.'
`I sew his ears on from time to time, sure'
Reply to: