Hi Thorsten, Thorsten Alteholz <alteh...@debian.org> writes: > On Mon, 5 May 2014, Toby St Clere Smithe wrote: >> I know you have the final say here, but the same document[1], under >> seciont 6.7.8.2 point 3 makes the converse point that the orig tarball >> "should, except where impossible for legal reasons, preserve the entire >> building and portablility infrastructure provided by the upstream >> author. For example, it is not a sufficient reason for omitting a file >> that it is used only when building on MS-DOS." > > yes, this is true for stuff that is not already in the archive (like > the MS-DOS build system). As you pointed out there is already an > option to ignore the embedded copy of boost. So the "building > infrastructure" is not harmed by removing boost.
Right. >> The rationale given is that it "is common for Debian users who need to >> build software for non-Debian platforms to fetch the source from a >> Debian mirror rather than trying to locate a canonical upstream >> distribution point", which I agree with! > > But those users could also fetch the boost library from the Debian mirror. This is also true. > Anyway, the suggestion from Anton is fine and I marked the package for > accept. Thanks. I'll follow the advice for the next upload. Cheers, -- Toby St Clere Smithe http://tsmithe.net -- debian-science-maintainers mailing list debian-science-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-science-maintainers
