Every week or two, somebody says "we need source dependencies." I don't have a proposal to present on how it should be done, but it doesn't seem like it should be too hard.
The control file would need a new field Source-Depends. This might be propagated to the .dsc file. When a source package is unpacked with dpkg-source, dpkg-source would check that the binary packages listed are available. If not, it should either warn the user, or refuse to unpack. (Probably warn the user, and return an error code.) Or it could be told how to run a command (like apt) to install the missing packages. I think Source-Depends should only list binary packages which are installed. Or should it be able to list source packages as well? This should not be needed very often. There would need to be some way for the Source-Depends field to be generated. Presumably manual; automatic would be too hard? Most packages would only need standard tools anyway (make, gcc, g++); a list of standard tools could be developed. Those tools would not need to be specified; only particular versions, and packages not normally installed. Source-Conflicts should not be needed. Source-Recommends Source-Suggests definately not. Only dpkg-source should need to be modified. I thought someone said Klee had developed a dpkg variant that did this already, but I couldn't find it poking around master. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3TYD [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Latest Debian packages at ftp://ftp.rising.com.au/pub/hamish. PGP#EFA6B9D5 CCs of replies from mailing lists are welcome. http://hamish.home.ml.org
