* Konstantinos Margaritis (mar...@genesi-usa.com) [101220 23:43]: > I never said it would be easy, but having said that, I like your > suggestion better, it's more elegant. > Of course it would still need changes from the maintainers, but it's > much easier to have that > accepted indeed.
Especially one could tweak e.g. debhelper in a way that it accepts per-package dependencies, and doesn't try to build packages where dependencies are missing. e.g., back to my example, in debian/control, that would be listed as: Source: bash Build-Depends: autoconf, autotools-dev, patch, bison, libncurses5-dev [!bootstrap], texinfo [!bootstrap], debhelper (>= 5), texi2html [!bootstrap], locales, gettext, sharutils, time, xz-utils Build-Depends-Indep: texlive-latex-base [!bootstrap], ghostscript [!bootstrap] Package: bash-doc Build-Depends: texinfo, texi2html, texlive-latex-base, ghostscript Which means that if any of these packages is not present, then debhelper doesn't build the package bash-doc. Some support to make debian/rules easier shouldn't be too hard, but should be done. > On 21 December 2010 00:17, Andreas Barth <a...@not.so.argh.org> wrote: > > That's not possible. There is a minimal set of packages > > build-depending on themselfs - but we should try to keep that set as > > minimal as possible. > These are not the rule to what I am suggesting. My point is eg. > multi-node cycles in the dependency tree, like lvm2, network-manager, > libsoup, avahi, subversion build-depending on kde, gettext(!) on git > and many more like that. Many of these seem to be avoidable (at least for the bootstrap-variant, and that's enough for our purposes - building them yet another time after the initial build isn't too bad, as long as that doesn't require manual actions), but e.g. bash build-depending on e.g. debhelper, which needs perl, which needs ... won't be easily achivable. Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20101220230422.gh2...@mails.so.argh.org
