Re: Source dependencies: are we ready?
On Tue, Oct 26, 1999 at 09:52:09AM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > At 00:14 +0100 1999-10-26, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > >Just a question which I haven't thoroughly investigated yet:
> > >
> > >I'm about to add #41232 (source dependencies) to the next policy
> > >version. But will this break existing tools? In particular, will the
> > >dpkg* tools yet be able to build a package using a Source-Depends:
> > >field, or will they die? If the latter, then we need a dpkg NMU
> > >(Wichert? Ben?) before this can be placed in policy.
> >
> > wtf? when did the proposal change to "Source-Depends:"? there's no
> > evidence of that in the logs.
>
> Sorry, I was doing things from memory. The proposal says:
>
> + <p>
> + This is done using the <tt>Build-Depends</tt>,
> + <tt>Build-Depends-Indep</tt>, <tt>Build-Conflicts</tt>, and
> + <tt>Build-Conflicts-Indep</tt> control file fields.
> + </p>
Ok, this is what I have as recognized fields in the current dpkg CVS. The
wording in that new proposal for bug #41232 through me for a loop. Anyway,
all that is left to be done for dpkg is have dpkg-buildpackage (and
possibly dpkg-source?) do something when the build depends aren't
satisfied.
Just so I don't have to go looking all over creation, what was the general
consensus on how dpkg-* scripts should handle and react to these fields?
Ben
Reply to: