[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Build-Depends-Indep, please review



In <20101120183255.GF12640@khazad-dum.debian.net>, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh 
wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>> >But hey, all the maintainer has to do is add 1, in words ONE, char to
>> >debian/rules. Just change "build:" to "build%:" and dpkg-buildpackage
>> >could use build-arch/indep targets instead of build. Aparently that is
>> >too much to ask.
>> 
>> I volunteer to make /this/ fix to any package that is unmaintained or
>> whose maintainer is unresponsive, *if* Debian will change policy to
>> /require/ build- arch/indep and make dpkg-buildpackage use them instead
>> of build sometime after the Squeeze release and before the Wheezy freeze.
>
>It can be done, but it must be done in at least two steps:
>
>1. Make it SHOULD, start fixing packages.  You don't have to wait for the
>   SHOULD to start fixing packages, either.

I'm not willing to manually test random packages for this breakage.  What's 
the best way to get an automated process to report on the PTS or BTS the 
existence of build-arch and build-indep?  Could it simply be a lintian test?

Also, I thought it was already a SHOULD.

>2. When almost everything is fixed, make it MUST.  Whatever doesn't get
>   fixed after that, gets axed from the next stable.

My time was volunteered (in my last posting) *after* it becomes a MUST, but 
with some help I might be willing to put some time in as part of a DEP.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.                   ,= ,-_-. =.
bss@iguanasuicide.net                   ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy         `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/                    \_/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: