On 8 September 2012 09:30, Adam Borowski <kilob...@angband.pl> wrote: > On Sat, Sep 08, 2012 at 05:08:34PM +1000, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: >> Package: wnpp >> Package name: optional-dev >> >> ######## >> >> There are situations when some of the libraries listed in Build-Depends >> are optional i.e. build system is smart enough to avoid failure when >> such library is missing. >> >> Often some development libraries are not available on all architectures >> in which case maintainer should know beforehand which architectures may >> satisfy this dependency and maintain an up-to-date list of architectures >> for such packages, like in the following example: >> >> Build-Depends: libchamplain-gtk-0.12-dev [!m68k !sh4], >> libopenipmi-dev [!hurd-any !arm] > [...] >> All the above problems may be addressed by using this package as >> alternative to optional build dependency like in the example below: >> >> Build-Depends: libchamplain-gtk-0.12-dev | optional-dev, >> libopenipmi-dev | optional-dev > > (Using "Build-Depends: libfoo-dev | optional-dev" below.) > > I'm afraid this is a bad idea for three reasons: > > 1. you'd get a misbuild if libfoo-dev happens to be temporarily > uninstallable due to a transition of something it depends on, > it or one of its dependencies happen to wait for a co-installed > multiarch package, and so on > > 2. same, if libfoo-dev is not yet built. It can happen if it has just been > uploaded, we're in the middle of an archive rebuild (a new arch, some > derivative), etc. > > 3. don't certain build modes (sbuild IIRC) ignore any alternatives in the > first place? If so, you'll cause a FTBFS.
4. the optional-dev can then be only used once, as once it's installed to satisfy one OR dependency.... you will not get the "real" once any more. I had a valid reason to use such "fake" or dependencies. When a -dev package splits into two & you want to build across distribution releases without modifying your packaging. gtkhtml was split into gtkhtml and gtkhtml-editor, to use single packaging across distro releases I did a dance of: gtkhtml-editor-dev | gtk-dev, gtkhtml-dev. And didn't specify gtk explicitely as it was pulled in by gtkhtml anyway. [1] [1] package names are for demonstration purposes only from my head, I am sure their real names are slightly different, but you get the point. Regards, Dmitrijs. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/canbhluhsielhd_wz1xko4_+minhkk-dt+eeh5s-tohidr7v...@mail.gmail.com
