Roger Leigh writes ("Re: re buildd's resolver and package's build deps"): > I agree that these do serve a useful purpose for these uses, and that > ease of reuse backporting and other types of porting are important. > However, there is no way to know which of those alternatives applies > to which suite. All of them are potentially going to be used for a > build in unstable, and it's this uncertainty which could potentially > lead to inconsistent builds.
Well then some mechanism needs to exist to make it predictable. The current arrangement, where buildds always use the first alternative, seems like a pretty simple one. Is it not adequate ? Ian. -- 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/19812.1329.374665.628...@chiark.greenend.org.uk