Re: Source-depends?

[ron@microtronics.com.au (Ron)]

> > I see two situations up front:
> >  - a need to describe the tools needed to build a package
> >     (eg. gcc, bison, flex, etc..)
> >  - and a need to describe the other source packages or librarys required
> >     to build a working binary.
> Why do these need to be treated differently?

They don't need to be if they are all available as .debs, but I
envisaged the possibility of:

> 3. Requiring bin-packages vs. requiring build trees from other package's
>    source

thinking about that though, I tend to agree with:

> In general, on prior discussions, ... on 3 it was suguested that
> requiring build trees from another package was considered buggy.

There are exceptions to this of course.. some packages require kernel
source to build modules etc.  but in general I would think that this
sort of dependency should be resolved by having a foo-dev.deb package.