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

Re: debian/rules override_dh_auto_build-indep

On 2011-11-10 08:20, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> Hi all,


>   I have been trying to split indep operations from the rest on the
> activiz.net package, see:
> http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/debian-med/trunk/packages/activiz.net/trunk/debian/rules?view=markup
>   However the -indep rules are still being called on the buildd machine:
> Eg:
> http://buildd.debian-ports.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=activiz.net&arch=s390x&ver=5.6.1-2&stamp=1320869304
> [...]
> Am I missing something here ?
> Thanks

This is one of the real issue behind the optional build-arch/build-indep
targets; since they are optional dpkg-buildpackage/buildds do not use
them.  Therefore, you cannot rely on them as a maintainer (yet).
  The purpose of adding the build-arch/build-indep targets is to reduce
the number of packages that "would be instantly RC-buggy if build-arch
and build-indep became mandatory targets"[0].  This should remove one of
the major blockers for fixing this (in my view) ridiculus behaviour
where the "Build-Depends-Indep" field is completely useless.

In your case, it seems to build just fine anyway... If the build-indep
does not require huge build-depends[1] or a lot of resources (i.e.
memory or build-time)[2], I would personally just merge
Build-Depends-Indep into Build-Depends and ignore it for now.
  The alternative is to do various hoops to conditionally skip
build-indep based on installed packages or delay it until binary-arch vs
binary/binary-indep is called (in which case you know whether or not to
build it).
  If you want to see an example, I have done the former in
libsysactivity.  But as may realize, it is a suboptimal trade-off
(delays failure on a indep build with missing B-D + plus error message
is more or less a "red-herring")


[0] See the proposed "build-arch target" release goal for more
information.  :)


[1] For reference graphivz + doxygen appears to be 31.4 MB in my clean
amd64 chroot (possibly including packages that would have been pulled
anyway by other Build-Depends).

[2] You may want to check the buildd logs for some of the slower archs
when you make this decision.

Reply to: