Julien Cristau <jcris...@debian.org> writes: > On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 12:24:07 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> - <tag><tt>Build-Depends-Indep</tt>, >> - <tt>Build-Conflicts-Indep</tt></tag> >> + <tag><tt>build</tt>, <tt>build-indep</tt>, <tt>binary</tt>, >> + and <tt>binary-indep</tt></tag> >> <item> >> - The <tt>Build-Depends-Indep</tt> and >> - <tt>Build-Conflicts-Indep</tt> fields must be >> - satisfied when any of the following targets is >> - invoked: <tt>build</tt>, <tt>build-indep</tt>, >> - <tt>binary</tt> and <tt>binary-indep</tt>. >> + The <tt>Build-Depends</tt>, <tt>Build-Conflicts</tt>, >> + <tt>Build-Depends-Indep</tt>, and >> + <tt>Build-Conflicts-Indep</tt> fields must be satisfied when >> + these targets are invoked. >> </item> >> </taglist> >> </p> >> - >> </sect> >> - >> </chapt> > This keeps the inconsistency between policy and actual practice about > what needs to be installed for the 'build' target, but I assume this is > intended? In that the buildds don't install Build-Depends-Indep? Yeah, that's a different bug which is normative (#374029). -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87631nyhef....@windlord.stanford.edu
