--- Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 1) Option to compile dependances as opposed to > > automatically downloading the dependant packages. > > I believe that apt-build can do this. Unfortunatly,
Ok, I haven't looked at apt-build yet. > > > 2) Option to add additional compile flags to gcc. > > pentium-builder lets you bolt this onto the side, > but is a hack. Doing That great, got that installed so I'll have a play :-) > > 3) Option not to create a .deb file. I wouldn't > want > > this but some people might. > > apt-src only builds debian packages if you pass it > the --build option Whoops, I should rtfm a bit more closely. > > 4) With depandancies it would be nice to be told > what > > must be installed and what depandancies are > optional. > > We don't have a Build-Recommends or Build-Suggests, > and it's not clear > they're worthwhile at all (from the perspective of > autobuilders). I more thinking along the lines of xyz apps need X and can optionally have GTK or QT as front end. So apt-src would inform you that you need X for it to work and the rest to get the fancy bits. > I could add an option to apt-src to make it not > resolve any build > dependencies, and just warn about missing ones or > something. That would be OK, although maybe a bit painful if there are a lot. Again the required vs. optional would need to be made clear. > > 5) Not sure it this is possible, but maybe > downloading > > source directly from author's site?? > > Not something I want to touch. Maybe if everyone > added watch files to > their packages, then use uscan. Fair enough. Jon __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
