Re: Bug#94827: tktable; Build-Depends: debhelper
On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 10:08:32AM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> problem is when following unstable, one sometimes has debhelper
> depends change fairly often. No sense forcing the build-depends
> maint to keep up with joeyh's rapid upload rates.
That's a reasonable argument for now, although we may want to
reconsider when/if debhelper stabilizes a bit. Which may not be too
far in the future. At this point, the vast majority of packages could
probably safely build-depend on debhelper >= 3.0.0 -- I know all of
mine can. Some can even still build-depend on unversioned debhelper,
but I'm switching to the 3.0.0 dh_installman for most.
I've never had a package that didn't build-depend on either
unversioned debhelper or 3.0.0.
> Besides, debhelper is not truly essential many package still do not use it.
That's a very flimsy argument. Lots of packages don't use gcc, huge
numbers don't use g++, but both of those are considered build-essential.
Bottom line, I think the short-term arguments against making debhelper
build-essential are decent, but long-term is another matter.
Chris Waters | Pneumonoultra- osis is too long
firstname.lastname@example.org | microscopicsilico- to fit into a single
or email@example.com | volcaniconi- standalone haiku