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

[Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es>]

On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:

> +          <p>
> +            It is not necessary for a source package to specify
> +            dependencies on the following packages: packages which are
> +            marked <tt>Essential</tt>; packages with the priority
> +            <tt>required</tt>; the <tt>dpkg-dev</tt> and <tt>make</tt>
> +            packages; and packages which are required for compiling
> +            and linking a minimal "Hello World" program written in C
> +            or C++.  Runtime library packages should not normally be
> +            specified in source dependencies.

Small comment: I like the informal way the "build-essential" packages are
described. However, for practical reasons, it would help to specify
also which ones they are at a given time. For example:

[...] and packages which are required for compiling and linking a minimal
"Hello World" program written in C or C++ (currently the following ones:
binutils, libc6-dev, gcc, [...]).

The idea would be to provide a real list, but also the rationale from
which the list is derived, so that whenever the list of build-essential
packages change, we just update policy accordingly, without changing the
spirit of it. How does this sound?


BTW: You mention both "Essential: yes" packages and "Priority: required" 
packages as the basis for the build-essential packages. Would not be
easier to specify just "Priority: required", or do you want dependencies
on, say, Essential packages of extra priority not to be specified?

Thanks.

-- 
 "10b71a6acfe945c43349f1765089edfe" (a truly random sig)