Hello people,
Today I was hit by the confusing fact that policy states that for the
"build" target to be invoked, both Build-Depends and Build-Depends-Indep
need to be satisfied, but at the same time the autobuilders don't seem
to install Build-Depends-Indep when invoking "build".
Section 7.6 of
Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > gri has had it for a long time.
>
> Oops; my script was buggy. There are at least 95 packages in sid/main
> which satisfy this criterion.
I was hoping the package count would increase.
:-)
On Sun, Apr 06, 2003 at 09:40:59PM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> 6 weeks ago, Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > As things stand with the buildds, the -Indep fields are almost
> > useless, and it may actually be worth dumping the -Indep field
> > altogether. tomcat, tomcat4, biglo
On Sun, Apr 06, 2003 at 09:40:59PM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> 6 weeks ago, Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > As things stand with the buildds, the -Indep fields are almost
> > useless, and it may actually be worth dumping the -Indep field
> > altogether. tomcat, tomcat4, biglo
6 weeks ago, Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As things stand with the buildds, the -Indep fields are almost
> useless, and it may actually be worth dumping the -Indep field
> altogether. tomcat, tomcat4, bigloo, bochs, dutch, gcc-avr,
> grub-installer, gstreamer, httrack, hylafax, late
On Tue, 18 Feb 2003, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > binary: binary-arch binary-indep
> > binary-arch: apt libapt-pkg-dev apt-utils
> > binary-indep: apt-doc libapt-pkg-doc
> > apt: build
> > libapt-pkg-dev: build
> > apt-utils: build
> > apt-doc: build-doc
> > libapt-pkg-doc: build-doc
>
> But if you ha
On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 12:20:49PM -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
> > Great! What do you mean by "split mode", though, and does this mean
> > that we must have something like "debian/rules -q build-arch"
> > returning a meaningful value?
>
> No, it means that build-indep is built during the binary-inde
On Tue, 18 Feb 2003, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 12:23:50AM -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Feb 2003, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> >
> > > So given how few packages we are talking about, would it be worth the
> > > buildds using all packages specified in both Build-Depends and
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 12:23:50AM -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Feb 2003, Julian Gilbey wrote:
>
> > So given how few packages we are talking about, would it be worth the
> > buildds using all packages specified in both Build-Depends and
> > Build-Depends-Indep and phasing out Build-Depen
On Tue, 11 Feb 2003, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> So given how few packages we are talking about, would it be worth the
> buildds using all packages specified in both Build-Depends and
> Build-Depends-Indep and phasing out Build-Depends-Indep?
I modified apt's build earlier this week to work in split m
On Tue, Feb 11, 2003 at 06:55:37PM +, James Troup wrote:
> Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > In that case, the buildds are broken: they don't install
> > > Build-Depends-Indep, even though they do invoke the clean and build
> > > targets of debian/rules (through dpkg-buildpacka
Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > In that case, the buildds are broken: they don't install
> > Build-Depends-Indep, even though they do invoke the clean and build
> > targets of debian/rules (through dpkg-buildpackage). See
> > http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.php?&pkg=freesci&ver=0.3.4
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 12:28:17AM +0100, Bas Zoetekouw wrote:
> Hi Julian!
>
> You wrote:
>
> > No: if binary-arch depends (in a Makefile sense) on build, then you're
> > not actually "invoking" build, and your make can do what it likes, as
> > long as you only need the Build-Depends packages.
Hi Julian!
You wrote:
> No: if binary-arch depends (in a Makefile sense) on build, then you're
> not actually "invoking" build, and your make can do what it likes, as
> long as you only need the Build-Depends packages. If you make build,
> then you should require both Build-Depends and Build-Dep
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 08:11:34PM +0100, Bas Zoetekouw wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: 3.5.8.0
> Severity: important
>
> Currently, policy says that following about Build-Depends-Indep (section
> 7.6):
>
> | The Build-Depends-Indep and Build-Conflicts-Indep fields must be
> | satisfi
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.5.8.0
Severity: important
Currently, policy says that following about Build-Depends-Indep (section
7.6):
| The Build-Depends-Indep and Build-Conflicts-Indep fields must be
| satisfied when any of the following targets is invoked: build, clean,
| build-indep, bin
16 matches
Mail list logo
