On 26/01/09 at 19:15 +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote: > * Mike Hommey [Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:13:10 +0100]: > > > On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 06:52:00PM +0100, gregor herrmann wrote: > > > On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 08:44:01 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > > > > > Personally, I'd add as a condition for this to be a reasonable > > > > request, the fact that there should be enough packages with enough > > > > test-only dependencies, which I'm not convinced it is the case. > > > > Are around 1200 arch:any libfoo-perl packages enough? They usually > > > duplicate the run-time dependencies in B-D-I for the tests > > > OT, but why do they need to *duplicate* these? Normaly, dependencies in > > B-D needn't appear in B-D-I. > > They duplicate the "Depends" line into B-D-I.
OTOH, we can't just say "let's change policy so that both depends and build-depends are required to build the package". It's a chicken-and-egg problem: binary deps are not known until you build the binary package... -- | Lucas Nussbaum | lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: lu...@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
