Marcin Owsiany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, Apr 27, 2001 at 06:00:07AM -0500, BugScan reporter wrote: > > > > Package: cvs (debian/main) > > Maintainer: Eric Gillespie, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > 95263 missing build dependency > > The policy says: > > A source package may declare a dependency or a conflict > on a binary package. > > Then why is missing build dependency considered an RC bug? > I know build-depends is a good thing, but shouldn't the policy > be changed then?
Hmm, it also says (in section 2.4.2): (emphasis mine) Source packages _should_ specify which binary packages they require to be installed or not to be installed in order to build correctly. ... _If_ build-time dependencies are specified, it _must_ be possible to build the package and produce working binaries on a system with only essential and build-essential packages installed and also those required to satisfy the build-time relationships (including any implied relationships). So officially, completely missing build-depends is a normal bug; incomplete build-depends is RC. Is this an inconsistency with the above quote from section 7.6, which uses the word "may"? -- Daniel Schepler "Please don't disillusion me. I [EMAIL PROTECTED] haven't had breakfast yet." -- Orson Scott Card