> He means have that as an ability, but I don't see that as relevant > to what we *need* for source depends to be useful.
Yep :-) > As an aside, I don't think the present dpkg-buildpackage is a > suitable platform for dependency checking, being that it's only a > shell script. This was my idea, too. I'm currently at writing a longer mail with some thoughts about this. > I've eliminated the tetex-bin dependency, BTW. Ah, no more readlink calls? Fine, deleting it... > bzip2 hadn't occurred to me as a dependency, but I guess it is. Yep, it's needed by tar xIf ... you use to unpack the tarballs. > What else? patch? Yep, but that's build-essential, as it's already used by dpkg-source. Other dependencies I have registered: gettext and time. gettext is pretty ok, time is a bit unusual but no problem. > libc-dev > gcc > g++ > libstdc++-dev > patch > make > dpkg-dev > binutils > bison Please not bison, it's too specific. My additions (all essential anyway): fileutils shellutils dpkg Roman
