Hi, I know this was discussed a few months ago, and the conclusion was that depending on linux-libc-dev (for packages which use linux/*.h headers) was unnecessary, since build-essential depends on libc6-dev which depends on linux-libc-dev.
However this is true only on Linux-based Debian architectures, which makes me wonder if depending on linux-libc-dev explicitly might not be useful to "mark" packages which won’t build on hurd and kfreebsd. Thus, having a Linux-specific package depend on linux-libc-dev would avoid spending too much time on it on the hurd-i386 and kfreebsd-amd64/kfreebsd-i386 buildds, without having to add an entry to Packages-arch-specific (or while waiting to add ...) or having to white-list all the supported platforms in the package’s Architecture control field. Does this seem like a reasonable approach? Stephen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
