George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Monday 12 June 2006 15:35, Robert Collins wrote: >> On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 08:12 -0400, Justin Pryzby wrote: >> > During the xlibs-dev transition, I learned that listing full >> > build-dependencies (not just the minimal set) is recommended, though I >> > don't know how widely accepted or followed this is. I don't mean >> > listing indirect build-deps, just the complete set of directly used >> > ones, even if one of the build-deps depends on another one. >> > devscript's dpkg-depcheck and dpkg-genbuilddeps may be useful. >> >> The basic idea is that if *your package* needs foo, then you must state >> foo - even if you also need bar which depends on foo. >> >> The reason for this is that you dont control the depends: of bar, so its >> quite possible for foo to stop being installed while your package builds >> without warning ... unless you have listed foo directly. >> >> That said, packages like gam and gam-dev are extremely unlikely to have >> that happen - I would tend to just build-dep on the -dev package there.
'Build-Depends: libfoo, libfoo-dev' would actualy wrong. See below. You can probably extend that to any -dev package, unless you actively run "gam" during build. > Agreed, build dependencies should be straightforward... and Policy #4.2 > stipulates "what others need is their business... or their bugs": > > When specifying the set of build-time dependencies, one should list only > those > packages explicitly required by the build. It is not necessary to list > packages which are required merely because some other package in the list of > build-time dependencies depends on them.[13] > > http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html#fr13 > > The reason for this is that dependencies change, and you should list all > those > packages, and only those packages that you need directly. What others need is > their business. For example, if you only link against libimlib, you will need > to build-depend on libimlib2-dev but not against any libjpeg* packages, even > though libimlib2-dev currently depends on them: installation of libimlib2-dev > will automatically ensure that all of its run-time dependencies are > satisfied. > > http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/footnotes.html#f13 Also when libimlib2 undegoes an ABI transition but not an API transition then libimlib2 gets renamed to libimlib3 but libimlib2-dev remains and depends on libimlib3 then. If you specify "Build-Depends: libimlib2, libimlib2-dev" then you will pull in a totaly useless libimlib2 and libimlib2-dev pulls in libimlib3. In some cases the non -dev packages can even conflict making your package unbuildable. So in conclusion: Just Build-Dep on the -dev. That will take care of the library. > Anyway the package is quite common... I also replied the guy with detailed > instructions how to turn the package in a good shape (ITP, manpage, watch > file, etc). He says he is busy working on it. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
