On 24-Apr-01, 05:25 (CDT), Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > No, I'm suggesting that build-depends could simply have an unversioned > > depends on debhelper. The buildds would then always[1] have the latest > > version of debhelper[2]. No effort required of the build-depends maint. > > But build-time dependencies aren't just for buildd's. Humans need them too. > I wouldn't like to have to compile a package and fail near the very end just > because it hasn't declared a proper versioned build-depends on debhelper.
Sorry, I screwed up in a confusing way throughout: s/build-depends/build-essential/. If you're building packages, you should have the latest versions of the packages listed in build-essential. If a specific package really has a maximum version of debhelper, it could list Build-Depends: debhelper (< x.y) but most packages wouldn't need that, just like most packages don't have a versioned dependency on the C++ compiler. The counter argument is that for people building unstable packages on a stable box with the stable build-essential, "latest" might not be nearly enough in the case of debhelper. (Of course, the C++ compiler is can move in big jumps too.) Steve -- Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read every list I post to.)