Hello, On Wed 25 Jul 2018 at 09:14PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Looks okay to me. As an alternative, we could encourage packages to > add an explicit Build-Depends on netbase if they need this > functionality. > > I think in the long run, I would prefer that since it would make the > concept of build-essential easier for new packagers to learn. Can we > both make it build-essential and recommend that packages include the > Build-Depends (as a policy "should" instead of a "must") to get the > best of both worlds? That way, we'd have a path to eventually > simplifying back again. build-essential is a set of functionality, whereas netbase is a particular implementation of some of that functionality. Coupling a requirement in the build-essential set to the current implementation in the Debian system would seem to defeat the point of including that requirement in the build-essential set. Another way of looking at this is that right now we have - build-essential -- functionality you can assume is there - package upon which you build-depend but your proposal, if I've understood it correctly, is to add a level in between: functionality you can assume is there but nevertheless you should build-depend on a package providing that functionality. -- Sean Whitton
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature