On Wednesday 01 November 2006 00:17 am, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 10:12:17PM +0100, Daniel Schepler wrote: > > After the recent upload of libsdl1.2-dev downgrading the *-dev > > dependencies to recommends, lots of packages (for example mednafen, > > missing a libgl-dev dependency) have started failing to build from source > > because they don't properly declare those dependencies themselves > > introduced by their own source. While this is unquestionably a bug in > > the other packages, the change breaks too many packages close to release > > time, so in my opinion the new version of libsdl1.2-dev should not make > > it into etch. > > As this is a case of exposing RC bugs in those packages, not causing them, > I'm inclined to disagree. Do you have a sense of how many packages are > actually affected by this change? I would hope that in this day and age, > the final count of affected packages would be relatively small. > > It's known that some other lib packages depending on libsdl1.2-dev need to > be rebuilt in order for the .la change to propagate upwards, but that > should be a trivial case of binNMUing.
So far, out of about 50 packages I've tried rebuilding with libsdl* and sdl* rebuilt, I've found 8 failures. Assuming the proportion continues for the rest, with approximately 200 SDL-using packages that I counted, that makes about 30 new RC bugs. Some of the most common failures: * [2] SDL_syswm.h needs the X headers. I'm not sure whether this should be fixed in libsdl1.2-dev or not; if it is, that could take care of about 1/3 to 1/2 of the failures. * [4] Packages using GL without proper Build-Depends. As a side note: audacious failed because pbuilder doesn't understand "libasound2-dev [linux-any]". Do the buildd's understand it? -- Daniel Schepler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
