On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 21:32:37 +0800, Shengjing Zhu wrote: > 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: > > > 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. I think Debian policy is rather clear here TBH. > > 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. Personally I don't think this is needed. But… > 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. …this seems (in addition, and not in contrast) also like something that we should be doing, but does not contradict that missing build-dependencies on tzdata are bugs. For context, historically prio:required packages have matched packages in the essential-set, and it has been a cheap way (a workaround really) for dumb tools like debootstrap to be able to pull that set w/o having to construct a dependency graph. I think though, debootstrap is a bit smarter now and can handle pulling the needed packages even if they are not prio:required, as libraries got their priority lowered recently. So it seems to me we have a bunch of packages that are prio:required but not Essential (some have switched to Protected:yes), that should get their priority lowered to (at least to) important: debconf e2fsprogs libpam-modules libpam-modules-bin libpam-runtime mount passwd tzdata So, someone should probably file a bug report against ftp.debian.org to get the overrides updated. Thanks, Guillem
