Bug#688251: #688251: Built-Using description too aggressive
- To: Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name>
- Cc: Ansgar Burchardt <ansgar@debian.org>, 688251@bugs.debian.org
- Subject: Bug#688251: #688251: Built-Using description too aggressive
- From: Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org>
- Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2017 17:30:29 -0800
- Message-id: <[🔎] 87lghqs2bu.fsf@hope.eyrie.org>
- Reply-to: Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org>, 688251@bugs.debian.org
- In-reply-to: <878ti31h8s.fsf@iris.silentflame.com> (Sean Whitton's message of "Mon, 28 Aug 2017 15:04:35 -0700")
- References: <510AF324.5070506@debian.org> <20120929170416.GB164@mannheim-rule.local> <20130911235734.GB23343@falafel.plessy.net> <20130923033350.GC25900@falafel.plessy.net> <CAKTje6ESSNyFz=pCWKibsVOBH_unhqBnHR2Y5O822zu93M5f-g@mail.gmail.com> <20130923090456.GF16832@falafel.plessy.net> <CAKTje6Gza-6FCUdDYz1Sb0-GX-OH_yoqAiVNzF7rWWU6k4Yr1Q@mail.gmail.com> <87eh8fa5bc.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu> <20130928124526.GA24759@falafel.plessy.net> <20131006083012.GC18924@falafel.plessy.net> <20120920180213.13120.2508.reportbug@windlord.stanford.edu> <20170826202105.kdma4qyimhafgybf@iris.silentflame.com> <20120920180213.13120.2508.reportbug@windlord.stanford.edu> <87ziakfahm.fsf@deep-thought.43-1.org> <20120920180213.13120.2508.reportbug@windlord.stanford.edu> <878ti31h8s.fsf@iris.silentflame.com> <20120920180213.13120.2508.reportbug@windlord.stanford.edu>
Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> writes:
> On Mon, Aug 28 2017, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
>> Sean Whitton writes:
>>> +This field should not be used for purposes other than satisfying
>>> +license requirements to provide full source code.
>> The DFSG requires source code to be provided too...
> Can you suggest a better word than 'full' to express the extra copyleft
> requirements that the Built-Using field is getting at?
I think you can address this objection by just saying "license or DFSG
requirements," although in general the DFSG requirements are satisfied by
Build-Depends in my opinion. We may not have *exactly* the source code
that was used to build the binary in all cases because of things like
static portions of libgcc, but we'll have all the *meaningful* source code
because building against any later version of gcc will produce the same
effective results. (Or, if not, we have a bug in our build dependencies
or elsewhere.)
Build-Using is more for cases where we have to have *exactly* the source
for legal reasons, even if a slightly different version of the source
would be fine for any practical purpose. I personally don't think the
DFSG is as strict there, and would be satisfied with any working and
practically equivalent version.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: