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

Bug#41232: debian-policy: [PROPOSAL] Build-time dependencies on binary packages

On Wed, Jul 14, 1999 at 03:20:34PM +0200, Roman Hodek wrote:
> Just one note: Arch-{Depends,Conflicts} might be unnecessary, as it
> should be very rare that someone only builds the arch-indep packages.
> So we could merge Arch-Depends into Depends. If one compiles with
> dpkg-buildpackage -B, he needs to look only at Depends.
> dpkg-buildpackage without -B needs to look at Depends + Indep-Depends.

This sounds doable.  Any opinions?

> For my current system I have defined the following packages as
> build-essential:

I wanted to avoid naming specific packages in Policy (I only named two in
the proposal, make and dpkg-dev), since packages change and it would be a
pain in the rear to change policy every time GNU Libc changes name, for

>   Depends-Sourcetree: tcl8.0 ("ln -s tcl8.0-* tcl8.0; cd tcl8.0; ./configure --prefix=/usr")

I want to keep this proposal as clean as possible; I don't want to see this
kind of kluging in it if at all possible. My intent is to let this proposal
to handle the majority cases.  The tough minority will need to be dealt with
separately (for example, by using your central dependencies forever for
these packages).

In my opinion, we should ban dependencies on source packages in the Policy
(although I'm not proposing that yet).

>  - The source dependencies can be specified the same way as normal
>    (binary) dependencies, i.e. you can depend on virtual packages,
>    alternatives, and you can specify version relations.

I tried to phrase the proposal (ie the diff) so that this would be true.
Did I fail?

>  - You don't need to specify packages that are dependencies of another
>    package that is already a source dependency, provided that nothing
>    is used explicitly from the first package.

Agreed.  Do you want to write the language for the Policy?  I'll accept it
as a part of this proposal, if you do.

>  - If a dependency on a -dev package is given, it must be a versioned
>    dependency if needed to ensure that the resulting (binary)
>    dependencies of built packages are unchanged.

Again, can you suggest a wording?

%%% Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho % gaia@iki.fi % http://www.iki.fi/gaia/ %%%

   "... memory leaks are quite acceptable in many applications ..."
    (Bjarne Stroustrup, The Design and Evolution of C++, page 220)

Reply to: