Re: Should build-depends only list direct dependencies?
On Mon, May 22, 2000 at 07:56:26AM +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> On Sun, May 21, 2000 at 05:16:39PM -0400, Michael Alan Dorman wrote:
> > If I'm building a module X, that depends on library Y, which depends
> > in turn on library Z, am I correct in assuming that I need only
> > specify a build-depends on library Y, and that the implicit dependency
> > on library Z can be considered taken care of?
>
> It depends :-)
>
> This is the intention: If you directly use Z, you should build-depend
> on it. If you need Z only because Y needs it, you should not build-depend
> on it.
>
> In other words, list only those packages *you* need. What others (for
> example the packages you build-depend on) need is their business.
Humm, looks reasonable, but ... i desagree.
It would be so it you are also building Y, or doing a 'make world'.
But if to build X you need the binary packages Y and Z installed, you
directly depend on them both, indipendently on the fact that Y, to
build, needs binary Z installed.
By contrary, if Y needs Z installed to build itself, and you need Y
installed to build X, but you do not need Z installed, then X is not
source-dependent on Z, but only on Y, regardless of the fact that Y is
build-dependent on Z.
This, obviously, considering that these build-depends are not propagated
as normal-depends in binary packages.
fab
--
| fab@pukki.ntc.nokia.com fpolacco@debian.org
| pgp: 6F7267F5 57 16 C4 ED C9 86 40 7B 1A 69 A1 66 EC FB D2 5E
| fabrizio.polacco@nokia.com gsm: +358 (0)40 707 2468
Reply to: