Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I would much prefer to see a new control field that explicitly lists >> the supported features. We're going to need that *anyway* for any >> feature that's only a should or recommended and not a must (such as >> supporting noopt or nostrip), and making every should into a must just >> so that we can use this interpretation of Standards-Version is not a >> solution. > So far I have not seen anything that would require it. I think it would be useful to advertise the optional capabilities of a package (noopt, nostrip, parallel) without forcing people to do trial and error. I suppose that's not a "require," but it certainly would be nice. > The build-arch target should be a must so no extra build option flag > needed. I really don't think that declaring the majority of packages in Debian buggy in this fashion is viable, particularly when nearly all packages in Debian will not benefit from this. My guess is that something on the order of 1% of packages have a meaningful distinction between build-arch and build-indep, if that, but that includes some packages that benefit a *lot*. Wouldn't it be better to only have to work on modifying the packages that will specifically benefit instead of making every other package maintainer in Debian add a new target that really isn't meaningful for their package? -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
