Re: Ocaml 3.08.0-2 ready to enter testing, hold back by 54+4 packages.
On Fri, Aug 06, 2004 at 10:15:36AM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> Incidentally, I should also add: Build-Deps are the wrong way to make
> sure things get built certain ways on certain archs.
>
> A Build-Dep is there to say that "these packages in these versions are
> required for a correct build of this package." I am, in effect, lying
> about ounit when I say it build-deps on 3.08 or greater of ocaml. (or
> 3.08 specifically.) This is not a wise general-purpose practice, and
> makes things like back- or forward-ports more difficult, and makes it
> more difficult for third parties to release packages that work with
> Debian. In this particular case, I did it because of the pressure to
> get things into testing fast. It is poor as a general policy, though.
>
> Normally, things will just percolate to testing correctly when new
> packages are uploaded. There is no particular need to force the
> autobuilders to rebuild it in general. If any particular arch has built
> it wrong, that's what a binary-only build is for. Not to mention that
> things can't enter testing if their deps aren't met.
Well, if you have a better understanding of how the autobuilder infrastructure
work, then by all way, explain to us what is the right way to make sure things
work as they should.
if people want to forward/backport, they should not do so without checking,
and it is not enough to just rebuild the packages in the current state, so the
build-dependency is indeed there. A little sed work replacing 3.08 by 3.07 or
3.09 should be enough in general, but not always.
Again, this is post sarge discussion.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: