El 28/1/23 a las 12:50, Andreas Henriksson escribió:
Policy is not a religion. Policy has many bugs. Policy is very outdated.
buildd is not a religion. buildd has bugs, etc.
Claiming there's no point to free software when the problem is simply that you are using an *unsupported* setup?!?!
Unsupported by whom? What is supported or unsupported is explained in policy. Policy says it must work. Therefore it should be supported (by fixing the bugs).
All debootstrap variants include Priority: required packages. As you can see they do so for a reason!
Yes, because debootstrap has a bug. So no, there is not a reason other than debootstrap insistence that this should be fixed by downgrading severities.
The --exclude option of debootstrap works equally well even on Essential: yes packages.
That's a straw man. I'm not proposing anything of the sort. Policy says packages must build when essential and build-essential packages are installed (plus build-dependencies).
If you think people should be able to build on top of their regular install with various packages installed and various configurations it
Another straw man. I'm not proposing anything of the sort.
If you think every packages should list just about all of the archive in Build-Conflicts just to not pick up unwanted extra autodetected dependencies that make the package FTBFS then I think it would be
Straw man. I'm not proposing anything like that. Please stop. You and others are essentially saying I should not follow policy and release policy (when it's absolutely trivial to do so) but instead some sloppy rule which is against policy and release policy. That kind of coercion to NOT follow policy must stop. Seriously. Thanks.
