On 20030903T212419+0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> When build-depends were first created, people started adding
> build-depends for arch-independent packages in multi-binary source
> packages, resulting in waste of resources by autobuilders installing
> packages they won't need to build the package.
Andrew Suffield wrote:
> Isn't "useless makework for the maintainer" the point of
> lintian/linda? :P
:-)
> The value is rather limited though... two cases I can think of, are
> trying to build the arch-dep components (which should do nothing,
> successfully) and adding an arch-dep component to t
On Thu, 4 Sep 2003 11:54:43 +0200, Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 08:29:43PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
>> If a package is strictly arch-indep, then nobody is likely to
>> benefit from the build-depends being split into the pieces needed
>> to run binary-indep, a
On Wed, 3 Sep 2003 12:54:42 -0400, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Joey Hess wrote:
>> If build-depends-indep need not be satified any time the clean
>> target is run, then I can imagine that some tool might be written
>> to rely on that, and only install the build-depends before building
>
On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 12:27:04PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> A strict reading of policy now indicates that Build-Depends-Indep need
> not ever be satisfied when the clean target is called. Apparently this
> change was made to document autobuilder behavior when building packages
> that mix arch all
On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 10:07:38AM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > If a package is strictly arch-indep, then nobody is likely to benefit
> > from the build-depends being split into the pieces needed to run
> > binary-indep, and the peices needed to run clean. It's just useless
> > makework for th
On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 08:29:43PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> If a package is strictly arch-indep, then nobody is likely to benefit
> from the build-depends being split into the pieces needed to run
> binary-indep, and the peices needed to run clean. It's just useless
> makework for the maintainer.
On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 08:29:43PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > When build-depends were first created, people started adding
> > build-depends for arch-independent packages in multi-binary source
> > packages, resulting in waste of resources by autobuilders installing
> > pa
Andrew Suffield wrote:
> Not quite; it should be modified to explicitly exclude
> debhelper. There are very few packages which are actually needed at
> clean time - the warning is correct for most things.
That does not agree with what Wouter said.
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> When build-depends were
At 8:49 am, Thursday, September 4 2003, Andrew Suffield mumbled:
> Not quite; it should be modified to explicitly exclude
> debhelper. There are very few packages which are actually needed at
> clean time - the warning is correct for most things.
>
Noted. The check in question now doesn't moan i
On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 03:43:06PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> FWIW, here's linda's rationalle for its warning:
>
> W: apt-src; Package has Build-Depends, but builds no arch-dependant packages.
> Package being checked declares Build-Depends, but does not actually build
> any architecture-dependant
Op wo 03-09-2003, om 18:27 schreef Joey Hess:
[...]
> Therefore it seemed to me that I should change the dozen or so arch all
> pacages I maintain to put debhelper in the build-depends (and generally
> everything in the build-depends for most of them since the split is
> useless unless the package
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> This has led to the confusion that people thought build-depends were
> intended for arch-dependent packages *only*. That isn't true.
> Build-depends should contain build-dependencies that are common to
> arch-independent and arch-dependent packages, as well as
> build-depen
Joey Hess wrote:
> If build-depends-indep need not be satified any time the clean target is
> run, then I can imagine that some tool might be written to rely on that,
> and only install the build-depends before building a package that is
> only arch: all.
Rather, that some tool remove the build-de
A strict reading of policy now indicates that Build-Depends-Indep need
not ever be satisfied when the clean target is called. Apparently this
change was made to document autobuilder behavior when building packages
that mix arch all and arch any components, but as I read it, the effect
is broader.
15 matches
Mail list logo
