On 02/12/2018 10:16 PM, Afif Elghraoui wrote: > Besides unnecessary repetition in d/control, lying to the build server in telling it that it needs a package in order to build could cause unnecesssary problems in bootstrapping. Well, but we're running a real-world system here. In an optimal world these runtime dependencies would be build dependencies because unit tests would run the code and depend on the libraries being present. Alas, sometimes that's not possible and packages are still not going to be useful (or installable) on architectures where those dependencies are missing. Making them explicit as build dependencies avoids having useless, uninstallable packages on those architectures. So it's about trade-offs and I think Julien's right. Kind regards Philipp Kern
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature