Hi, Quoting Henrique de Moraes Holschuh (2014-07-07 14:07:26) > Please don't assume that the unused build dependency is always where the > defect is. Rather, the MBF text should account for the possibility that the > unused build-dependency should have been used in the first place, but > something is broken in the build and it is being left unused.
you are correct, this should be mentioned. Here the updated text: --%<--------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Maintainer, the build dependencies $foo, $bar and $baz of this source package do not seem to be needed. Neither are any of their files accessed during the build nor are their dependencies on other binary packages required. This can either mean that the build dependency is superfluous and should be removed to make bootstrapping easier or it indicates a bug where a package should be used but is in fact not. Please remove the build dependency from the Build-Depends in the former case or fix the build procedure in the latter. You can find more detail about the procedures that were used to find this problem in the MBF announcement on debian-devel: $email -->%--------------------------------------------------------------------------- thank you! cheers, josch -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140707123210.14505.41481@hoothoot
