On 09/02/09 at 01:13 -0800, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Mon, 09 Feb 2009, Fabian Greffrath wrote: > > - Build-Recommends would list packages that are basically available > > in the Debian archive, but are not available on all architectures or > > for all kernels. > > Unfortunatly, making missing build-dependencies a non-fatal error > causes builds to be non-deterministic. > > For example, consider a case where libasound2-dev was a no longer > provided due to an API change to libasound3-dev, and for whatever > reason, libasound3-dev wasn't installable on some arch subsets > (perhaps because libasound3 hadn't yet been built.) > > > Why have I added libfaad-dev to the Build-Recommends? Because in > > Ubuntu ffmpeg-debian is in the main section, while faad2 is not. So > > in order to merge ffmpeg-debian to Ubuntu, the maintainer has to > > manually remove this Build-Depends each and every time. As soon as > > Ubuntu would support the suggested approach, this would be obsolete. > > I wouldn't be averse to some method of describing additional types of > conditional dependencies, such as differentiating builds of packages > on Debian and Ubuntu. [A hideous method of doing this[1]: > Build-Depends: libfaad-dev | some-only-in-ubuntu-package.]
Couldn't we introduce a pseudo-arch/port named ubuntu, and use: Build-Depends: libfaad-dev [!ubuntu]? Of course, that leaves the question of whether Debian maintainers will agree to add Ubuntu-specific information in their source stanzas. But this doesn't have to be mandatory anyway. -- | 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
