On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 9:07 PM Santiago Vila <sanv...@debian.org> wrote: > > El 21/11/22 a las 3:19, Shengjing Zhu escribió: > > On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 12:03:40AM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote: > >> I've detected a bunch of Go packages which do not build from source because > >> they use tzdata without a build-dependency. > >> > >> This will not happen if tzdata is installed by default, but such package is > >> not really build-essential, so this is technically a FTBFS bug in a release > >> architecture. > > > > tzdata's priority is required. Is this an effort to make tzdata optional? > > Being "priority: required", being "essential: yes", and being > build-essential are all three different things. > > My intent is to keep stable free from FTBFS bugs, i.e. packages which do > not follow this paragraph in policy: > > "If build-time dependencies are specified, it must be possible to build > the package and produce working binaries on a system with only essential > and build-essential packages installed and also those required to > satisfy the build-time relationships (including any implied relationships)." >
So I think we have different interpretations for the policy. > As you suggest, maybe it would help if debootstrap did not install > tzdata in the buildd profile (maybe I will file another bug for that), > but this is completely orthogonal to my original aim, which is to have > those bugs fixed in stable. That's why I asked for advice about the best > way to achieve that. Can we continue on the go-pkg list? > I think it should be on debian-devel. And if the consensus is that required packages should be explicit set at build-depends. We should ensure buildd doesn't include them. Otherwise we can only fix the packages you have listed today. More packages may miss it tomorrow. -- Shengjing Zhu
