On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 02:03:08PM +0000, Wookey wrote: > Doing my builds on a testing machine, then uploading to > unstable can mean I introduce packages compiled against the wrong library > versions. Source-only uploads would solve this and I could do test-compiles > on some debian machine.
Off topic - you can have an unstable chroot on your testing machine for this, eg. with pbuilder. > > - insufficiently-narrowed deps, causing stuff to migrate where it > > should not > > => this looks like a real non-trivial problem to me. Ideas anyone ? > > Obviously it can be tricky for a maintainer to get right as they can't > necessarily try all (any!) of the possibilities but it should be aspired-to. > On the other hand, in my experience build-deps are sometimes > unecessaily-narrowed and require new versions of things for no particular > reason I can determine. I suspect the shlibdeps automation contributes to > this? Hm, the shlibdeps automation should not have an influence on build-deps, which belong to *source* packages only. One thing I see about this, however, is that sometimes a rebuild with more recent libs is required to get rid of some bug. And since there's no guaranty that a buildd has all latest versions (see http://people.debian.org/~dirson/buildinfo/ for a demo), I (and probably others) tend to add versionned builddeps as >=, whereas it should probably be an unversionned build-dep, together with a version range in build-conflicts. There may also be the case where one cannot exactly determine from changelogs (debian _and_ upstream) what version of a builddep is needed, and make a safe bet. Regards, -- Yann Dirson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Why make M$-Bill richer & richer ? Debian-related: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Support Debian GNU/Linux: Pro: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Freedom, Power, Stability, Gratuity http://ydirson.free.fr/ | Check <http://www.debian.org/>
