Hi all,
while working on proftpd backport I've been stumbling about the fact
that the proftpd package did not declare a build-dep on the libattr1-dev
package. The package is clearly needed if you're going to build it by
hand. I've been expecting the package to FTBFS on the buildds but the
opposite
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 10:58:33AM +0100, Sven Hoexter wrote:
while working on proftpd backport I've been stumbling about the fact
that the proftpd package did not declare a build-dep on the libattr1-dev
package. The package is clearly needed if you're going to build it by
hand. I've been
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 02:05:55AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 10:58:33AM +0100, Sven Hoexter wrote:
while working on proftpd backport I've been stumbling about the fact
that the proftpd package did not declare a build-dep on the libattr1-dev
package. The package
And isn't it a good idea to declare a build-dep even in this case?
proftpd would FTBS if libacl1-dev would drop its dependency on libattr1-dev.
Is there a commonly accepted rule on these particular cases?
There is. If the package directly depends on libattr1-dev (this usually
means it
On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 11:54:28AM +0100, Benjamin Mesing wrote:
And isn't it a good idea to declare a build-dep even in this case?
proftpd would FTBS if libacl1-dev would drop its dependency on libattr1-dev.
Is there a commonly accepted rule on these particular cases?
There is.
5 matches
Mail list logo