On 31-Aug-00, 16:52 (CDT), Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think that you start with a particular version dependency, and then > only update the dependency if you use new features not present in > older helper packages.
This can be tricky, as it is easy to use a new feature without realizing it, unless one digs through the changelog everytime one edits debian/rules. Arguably, though, that's a reasonable cost for using the helper package, so I'll concede. > Actually, I do have versioned dependencies on dpkg-dev, and > the process works as I outlined above -- older version of dpkg-dev > broke for my packages, and I created a versioned dependency -- and > have never had to change that, really. That's fine -- if there is a need for the dependency, add it. But forcing many developers to add a build-depends line solely in order to specify "debhelper" seems unnecessary. > Well, I think that these customers are so few, and need to be > quite competent, often have to have a list of packages that goes > beyon just the build essentials. We should not need a policy and a > package for just these consumers. The whole Build-Depends stuff originated from the need of the large scale auto-builders and architecture porters to be able to reliably build packages. > Our differences seem to stem from this basic difference in > opinion: whom is the build essentials package primarily for? And my > take is that the primary consumers are the developers of the 5000+ > packages, and additionally, a few buld daemons, most of whom need a > core set that may not be reflected in build essentials. Your opinion, > obviously, differs. I think I miswrote earlier: I wrote "build-essentials" when I should have written "Build-Depends". And I'd wager that the vast majority of the Debian developers have no need at all for Build-Depends. The "build-essentials" list *is* needed to prevent them from going crazy *supporting* Build-Depends. But that's the only reason build-essentials exists -- without Build-Depends, there's no need. And if the auto-builder core set is not represented buy build-essentials, then I think there's something wrong. Note that I'm *not* saying Build-Depends is a bad thing: the porters do a incredible job, and anything that makes their lives easier is worth doing. But we ought to also minimize the cost to the other developers. Steve -- Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read every list I post to.) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
