Re: maintenance of dpkg (Re: I've verified some dpkg bugs)
At 00:38 +0200 1998-04-20, Christian Schwarz wrote:
> - dpkg is hard to compile (at least for me :). I tried doing so a few
> days ago but didn't succeed.
The most major problem is the multitude of unnecessary "source-depends",
packages that dpkg shouldn't need to compile are automake, autoconf,
gettext, and libtool, the calls to those should only need to be done once
for each release, by the person who uploads the source package. I think the
docs should be produced from their source only once, and the pre-made docs
should be in the source package.
I hope that someone intends to work on this (I would try, but even the dpkg
makefiles are barely within my comprehension :).
This would make it much easier to get dpkg built on a new architecture (by
decreasing "source-depends"[1] to only normal build tools (gcc, binutils,
make, etc.), and libc and ncurses), and in some cases, make it possible for
a clean non-i386 architecture build to be done (I hear lout doesn't work on
m68k for example).
[1] apropos to that, it seems to me that dpkg-source and dpkg-gencontrol
could be quite easily modified to deal with at least the presence of a
"Source-Depends:" field. I may post a proposal to debian-policy regarding
this if no objections are raised here.
--
Joel "Espy" Klecker <mailto:jk@espy.org> <http://web.espy.org/>
Debian GNU/Linux Developer...................<http://www.debian.org/>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: