Re: Source Dependencies, a real solution
On Thu, Jan 14, 1999 at 10:12:46AM -0500, Brandon Mitchell wrote:
> I'd agree with the "Build-Depends" name. Also, what if it just prints a
> note whenever it reads a "Source-Depends". Then if someone wants to add
> the feature later on, the place is there and the specs have already been
> defined. I assume you are just printing a warning if a "Build-Depends"
> isn't satisified.
If it finds the "Source|Build-Depends" field, it atleast prints "checking
source dependencies" (will change to build dependencies). If nothing is
wrong then it prints nothing further. If there is no field, then it
happily continues without skipping a beat or giving notice. As I said
before, I am of the opinion that the field should be voluntary and not
required (although bug reports could be filed if some one feels it is
needed for as certain package).
--
----- -- - -------- --------- ---- ------- ----- - - --- --------
Ben Collins <b.m.collins@larc.nasa.gov> Debian GNU/Linux
UnixGroup Admin - Jordan Systems Inc. bcollins@debian.org
------ -- ----- - - ------- ------- -- The Choice of the GNU Generation
Reply to: