Re: [Reproducible-builds] Bug#138409: Bug#138409: Bug#138409: Bug#138409: dpkg-dev: please add support for .buildinfo files

2016-02-04 Thread Johannes Schauer
Hi,

Quoting Holger Levsen (2016-02-04 11:31:32)
>  (AFAIK transitive build-depends are all possible build depends,

no, that would be the build dependency closure ;)

> so if a package build depends on python2 || python3 both python versions will
> be part of the transitive build depends. (Is that even correct?)

that is correct.

cheers, josch


signature.asc
Description: signature
___
Reproducible-builds mailing list
Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Bug#138409: Bug#138409: Bug#138409: Bug#138409: dpkg-dev: please add support for .buildinfo files

2016-02-04 Thread Holger Levsen
Hi Josch,

On Donnerstag, 4. Februar 2016, Johannes Schauer wrote:
> >  (AFAIK transitive build-depends are all possible build depends,
> no, that would be the build dependency closure ;)

and
 
> > so if a package build depends on python2 || python3 both python versions
> > will be part of the transitive build depends. (Is that even correct?)
> that is correct.

don't match, or at least don't help me with the question "what are transitive 
build depends"…

Thanks for proving my point :-D


cheers,
Holger



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Reproducible-builds mailing list
Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds

Re: [Reproducible-builds] Bug#138409: Bug#138409: Bug#138409: Bug#138409: dpkg-dev: please add support for .buildinfo files

2016-02-04 Thread Jérémy Bobbio
Holger Levsen:
> I know that *you* have grasped the concept of transitive build depends very 
> well, but I'm pretty sure that 97% of the DD population have no idea what 
> transitive build depends are, especially compared to build-depends or 
> alternative build-depends. And even 70% were too many.

Sorry Holger but we are introducing new concepts. So sure, 97% of the DD
population have no idea what we are talking about, but that's fine.

We have to educate them about .buildinfo file and what the various
fields mean. We have to aim at field names that are as unambigious as
possible to avoid laying traps on users.

For the particular case of “Installed-Transitive-Build-Depends”,
it's easy enough to explain “these are the name and version of all
packages which made building these binary packages possible”. Math
geeks can get a more formal definition.

“Built-Using” is already taken with a very precise meaning (and is there
for license-compliance reasons), but that would be the simpliest way to
sum up the short statement above. Given these are .buildinfo files, I
would be bold and suggest just “Using”.


I need to state that I care more about not drowning ourselves in bike
shedding than finding the perfect name.


-- 
Lunar.''`. 
lu...@debian.org: :Ⓐ  :  # apt-get install anarchism
`. `'` 
  `-   


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Reproducible-builds mailing list
Reproducible-builds@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/reproducible-builds