Re: Bug#41232: debian-policy: [PROPOSAL] Build-time dependencies on binary packages
> I would like to use this suggestion. Comments?
See my previous mail: I'd say the -Arch variants are unnecessary, but
if everybody wants them for clearness of design, I won't oppose.
> Sounds good. Actually, that was what I had originally in mind. If
> there are no objections, I'll make this part of my proposal
> (seconders: I need your comments!).
Ok with me.
> > I think that texinfo shouldn't be there.
>
> Agreed.
texinfo etc. were out of the games for a long time, I thought :-)
> I see the point of this suggestion, but I'm not sure the wording is
> wise. We can't expect to be able to compile the unstable
> distribution while satisfying build dependencies with packages in
> the stable distribution (think of Gnome in potato or a libc upgrade,
> for example).
I think you've mis-read Ian's statement here. He didn't say that
source dependencies might be satisfied from stable only (this would
indeed be nonsense). But a consequence is that the src-deps must be
properly versioned so that the appropriate packages from unstable are
installed.
Roman
Reply to: