> > You know, some build-deps should be kept as-is, and some should be > > changed to -arch-cross. A good alrorithm is to convert (to > > -$arch-cross) packages from lib and libdevel sections, while keeping > > all the rest as-is. But information of package sections is not easily > > available. Converting everything by default and using only 'keepdeps' > > and 'ignoredeps' to override is a bad idea IMHO. It will make these > > lists completely unmaintainable. And 'ignoredeps' will become > > package-dependent. > > At first it was important to get a version working.
I'm afraid it will make more harm than value if implemented based on removedeps/keepdeps only. To make this functional, we will have to add at least half of >10000 debian packages to those lists. If we don't, almost every run of a cross dpkg-buildpackage on a new package will get an 'unsatisfied build deps' error. This will be too anoying. > Yes, this stupid > implementation may lead to more maintership. > The idear with determining the section of a package is a good I think. > Using libapt-pkg-perl it should be easy get it working. Note that apt cache available on host is for host architecture, not the target one. Although I'm not aware of a situation where package section differs from arch to arch, at least some packages are available on some architecture and not available on others.
