Cc'd to debian-devel, because I'm honestly unsure about this... On Sun, 2003-10-19 at 09:51, Adam Conrad wrote:
> Package: libtool
> Version: 1.5-3
> Severity: serious
>
> libtool fails to build from source on all the buildds[1] due to a missing
> build-dep on texi2html.
>
libtool (and libtool1.4) *have* a build-dep on texi2html (and texinfo):
Build-Depends-Indep: debhelper (>= 4.0), texi2html, texinfo
Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 4.0), file, g77 | fortran77-compiler, gcj [!hppa
!mips !mipsel]
My reading of policy suggests that this is correct:
----8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<--------8<----
`Build-Depends-Indep', `Build-Conflicts-Indep'
The `Build-Depends-Indep' and `Build-Conflicts-Indep' fields must
be satisfied when any of the following targets is invoked:
`build', `build-indep', `binary' and `binary-indep'.
[1] If you make "build-arch" or "binary-arch", you need Build-Depends. If
you make "build-indep" or "binary-indep", you need Build-Depends and
Build-Depends-Indep. If you make "build" or "binary", you need both.
---->8-------->8-------->8-------->8-------->8-------->8-------->8-------->8----
texinfo and texi2html are used in the "build" target. As far as I can
tell this means that the buildd should be ensuring both Build-Depends
and Build-Depends-Indep are installed before running it.
Have I read policy wrong, or is policy not entirely in accord with
reality?
> [1] http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?arch=&pkg=libtool
> [2] http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?arch=&pkg=libtool1.4
>
The hppa, mipsel and mips builds didn't fail because of this -- they
failed because they couldn't satisfy the dependency on gcj which is
marked [!hppa !mips !mipsel]. Is this dpkg being broken?
Scott
--
Have you ever, ever felt like this?
Had strange things happen? Are you going round the twist?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
