On Wed, 30 Nov 2011, peter green <plugw...@p10link.net> wrote: > Some packages have runtime dependencies on packages that they do not > have corresponding build-dependencies for. This leads to the building of > uninstallable packages which in turn leads to problems with testing > transition of packages. > > Currently there are two workarounds for this situation > > 1: manually alter the package's architecture list to limit building to > those architectures where runtime dependencis > 2: add an artificial build-dependency
Why are such things required? Why not have software which wants to have the dependencies of a package look at the dependencies line as well as the build-dependencies? It seems to me that the package maintainers are already providing the necessary information and the people who maintain autobuilder systems just need to use it. I can't imagine that changing lots of packages and keeping track of new packages with similar issues would take less work than changing an autobuilder. I also can't imagine that changing lots of packages would be as reliable. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/ -- 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/201112021230.36184.russ...@coker.com.au
