Bug#688251: #688251: Built-Using description too aggressive

[Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org>]

Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> writes:

> diff --git a/policy/ch-relationships.rst b/policy/ch-relationships.rst
> index 3a73f7b..499bed9 100644
> --- a/policy/ch-relationships.rst
> +++ b/policy/ch-relationships.rst
> @@ -598,17 +598,26 @@ earlier for binary packages) in order to invoke the targets in
>  Additional source packages used to build the binary - ``Built-Using``
>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  
> -Some binary packages incorporate parts of other packages when built but
> -do not have to depend on those packages. Examples include linking with
> -static libraries or incorporating source code from another package
> -during the build. In this case, the source packages of those other
> -packages are a required part of the complete source (the binary package
> -is not reproducible without them).
> -
> -A ``Built-Using`` field must list the corresponding source package for
> -any such binary package incorporated during the build,  [#]_ including
> -an "exactly equal" ("=") version relation on the version that was used
> -to build that binary package.  [#]_
> +Some binary packages incorporate parts of other packages when built
> +but do not have to depend on those packages. Examples include linking
> +with static libraries or incorporating source code from another
> +package during the build. In this case, the source packages of those
> +other packages are part of the complete source (the binary package is
> +not reproducible without them).
> +
> +When the license of either the incorporated parts or the incorporating
> +binary package requires that the full source code of the incorporating
> +binary package be made available, the ``Built-Using`` field must list
> +the corresponding source package for any binary package incorporated

...any affected binary package....

Even if you have to use Build-Using, that doesn't mean you need to list
the version of gcc you used because of the static contents of libgcc.

> +during the build, [#]_ including an "exactly equal" ("=") version
> +relation on the version that was used to build that version of the
> +incorporating binary package.  [#]_
> +
> +This causes the Debian archive to retain the versions of the source
> +packages that were actually incorporated.  In particular, if the
> +versions of the incorporated parts are updated but the incorporating
> +binary package is not rebuilt, the older versions of the incorporated
> +parts will remain in the archive in order to satisfy the license.
>  
>  A package using the source code from the gcc-4.6-source binary package
>  built from the gcc-4.6 source package would have this field in its
> @@ -625,6 +634,11 @@ field in its control file:
>  
>      Built-Using: grub2 (= 1.99-9), loadlin (= 1.6e-1)
>  
> +This field should not be used for purposes other than satisfying
> +license requirements to provide full source code.  In particular, it
> +should not be used to enable finding packages that should be rebuilt
> +against newer versions of their build dependencies.
> +
>  .. [#]
>     The relations ``<`` and ``>`` were previously allowed, but they were
>     confusingly defined to mean earlier/later or equal rather than

Seconded the above change and with or without the wording change discussed
in the other part of this thread.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>