On 03/10/2011 10:32 PM, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 09:50:57PM +0100, gregor herrmann wrote: >> On Thu, 10 Mar 2011 10:51:50 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > >>>>> get-build-deps >>>> Is this an alias for "apt-get build-dep $1"? >>> No, it's a tool that's been long missing from a Debian as a standard >>> interface - "install the build-dependencies for the package in my current >>> directory". > >> Sounds similar to 'mk-build-deps -i debian/control'. >
Note that you don't have to say "debian/control" there. It's the default. I wonder why "-i" and "-r" aren't activated by default though. >> That's not a vote for "get-build-deps is useless" but an >> encouragement for merging similar efforts and combining forces. > > Certainly, I agree that efforts should be merged. In a sense, that's what > this request to take u-d-t scripts into devscripts is about. :) > > FWIW, mk-build-deps is close, but not exactly what I'm looking for > personally. I really want a command that, without needing to specify any > extra options, does 'mk-build-deps -i -r debian/control', because I think > this is the common case. I also think we're missing as a standard interface > a tool that *tells* us what build-dependencies need to be installed (and > what build-conflicts need to be removed), in a form that's automatically > consumable by other tools including, but not limited to, apt-get. > dpkg-checkbuilddeps fails this because it only tells which b-d's are > unsatisfied, in a form that has to be further processed. > I hope that this poney^W two-lines script won't use "sudo" (again). Regards, -- Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي http://dogguy.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d7949d6.6090...@dogguy.org
