[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#112809: marked as done (cccd: no manual page)

On Mon, Jan 07, 2002 at 10:44:13PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Jan 2002, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 07, 2002 at 02:18:26PM -0600, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> > > Description:
> > >  cccd       - A small GTK+ CD player program
> > > Changes:
> > >  cccd (0.3beta4-1) unstable; urgency=low
> > >  .
> > >    * debian/control:
> > >       + Removed unnecessary Build-Depends libglib1.2-dev, xlib6g-dev, xlibs-dev.
> >
> > Erm. The obvious question: WTF?
> I'm guessing that this is because the build dependency on libgtk1.2-dev
> does indirectly include these build dependencies (the libgtk1.2-dev
> package depends on libglib1.2-dev and xlibs-dev and for sure this won't
> change in the future). If this is the case I can't see any _good_ argument
> whether it's better to keep or to remove the other build dependencies.

I think I read it in the Policy once... if the package links just to that
one library, merely build-depending on it is fine; however, if it
explicitely links to the others that just happen to be depended upon by that
particular one, the other build-dependencies need to stay.

I'm just checking if Uwe was changing it because of brevity or because he
checked it all out and made sure proper procedure was followed already with
just one build-dependency :)

     2. That which causes joy or happiness.

Reply to: