On 7 April 2013 at 13:01, Julian Gilbey wrote: | On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 11:17:31AM +0200, Philip Rinn wrote: | > On 07.04.2013 03:07, Julian Gilbey wrote: | > > Ah, thanks Chris, I wasn't aware of that! But then it seems to me | > > that the correct lines should be: | > > | > > Build-Depends: ..., r-base-dev, ... | > > [...] | > > Depends: ..., ${R:Depends}, ... | > > | > > as the source package is *not* dependent upon the R version, only the | > > binary package resulting from it; this will aid any backporters, for | > > example. | > No, you have to Build-Depend on the minimal R version your package needs. | > A (probably bad) example: sactterelot3d needs R >= 2.7.0 so my Build-Depends is: | > | > Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 9), cdbs, r-base-dev (>= 2.7.0) | | Yes, indeed. My bad. But it does *not* need to depend on r-base-dev | (>= 3.0.0) unless the package actually requires 3.0.0 functionality.
And we really do sometimes have the superset as R also imposes. Right now the only reason we are rebuilding is ... so that R (at run-time, when loading the package) sees it as being produced by R (>= 3.0.0). | Uploading erm 0.14-0-6 with the correct build-time dependencies; | raschsampler has no specified R version dependency, so leaving that | one unspecified. I still think that is wrong but you ipso-facto get the right thing to happen. But for my packages, I do make this explicit. Dirk -- Dirk Eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org | http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20833.31680.984007.402...@max.nulle.part