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

Bug#883233: First footnote to section 7.1 should say which of Debian's autobuilders ignore alternative dependencies

Package: debian-policy
Severity: normal
User: debian-policy@packages.debian.org
Usertags: informative

On Thu, Nov 30 2017, Rebecca N. Palmer wrote:

> Should [section 7.1, footnote 1] also make explicit which Debian
> suites have this restriction?
> I thought this rule also applied to backports having found [0] in a list
> archive search, and hence have been explicitly changing dependencies for
> backports [1] instead of using alternatives.

Yes, good point.  Backports autobuilders use --build-dep-resolver=aptitude
which (I believe) considers alternative dependencies.

> However after finding this proposal, I checked build logs, which
> suggest that sid (including -ports architectures) and stable do but
> backports doesn't.  (Though we should probably check that with someone
> who knows this better before writing it into Policy...)

Agreed, we need some clarity.

wanna-build team / Release Team / Backports Team: exactly which buildds
ignore alternative dependencies?  We want to include this in an
(existing) Policy footnote.


Sean Whitton

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: