Policy Weekly Issue #4/16: New source package format
> The discussion of the following topics has been postponed, until the new
> source package format is discussed:
>
> * source dependencies
> * new control fields (Author, Upstream-Site, etc.)
I'd like to discuss and settle on a syntax and semantic for at least
one new source control field, `Source-Depends'. It would indicate a
package or packages (perhaps with versions) without which the package
would not be guaranteed to build or might build incorrectly (though
the latter should be avoided if possible).
It would not be checked by dpkg-source except to issue a warning if
the required package(s) weren't installed. dpkg-buildpackage could
check, though, and could be given a new option to override the
dependency.
As far as I am concerned there is only one remaining issue to be
settled with regard to this field: the list of packages upon which
dependencies do not need to be listed. I propose that this list be:
packages which have `Priority: Standard' or better (as determined by
the archive maintainers, rather than the package maintainers, if there
is a difference).
I want this field to be specified now because the lack of it is the
only thing stopping most of the distribution being (in principle)
built automatically.
If and when it is specified it will be possible to write a script
which installs the required packages and does the build,
automatically. Furthermore, the Source-Depends field can be checked
automatically by having the script use an up-to-date system and
install precisely the Standard packages plus those named in the
Source-Depends.
Any changes to the source format to allow (for example) more variation
in upstream source formats or shared pieces of original, Debianised or
built source code will not affect this field. Even any switch to a
single-file binary source archive will not make this change obsolete;
such a switch could be done by modification of only dpkg-source, and
wouldn't require changes to packages' debian/control files.
Ian.
Reply to: