On Wed, 4 Mar 2026, Max Nikulin wrote:
On 02/03/2026 5:16 am, Tim Woodall wrote:
On 2026-03-01 at 11:22, Tim Woodall wrote:
Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 9), libncurses-dev, automake, libtool,
autoconf, comerr-dev (>= 2.1-1.43.3-1~bpo8+1), e2fslibs-dev (>=
1.43.3-1~bpo8+1), libblkid-dev, libbz2-dev, liblzo2-dev,
libdevmapper-dev, libreadline-dev, libselinux1-dev, pkg-config, uuid-
dev, zlib
E: Build-Depends dependency for dump cannot be satisfied because
candidate version of package e2fslibs-dev can't satisfy version
requirements
I've had a quick look at apt source to see if I can patch it to accept the
/jessie-backports syntax.
I do not think it is a bright idea. I expect that pinning specific packages
instead of the whole backports repository should work.
Stuff related to specific distributions or code names should be minimized in
source packages since it increases maintenance burden.
Perhaps I've hit a peculiar corner case, or perhaps there's a better way
to do this, but I disagree that it 'increases maintenance burden'
If I want to build a trixie-backports package, and that must depend on
another package in backports, then being able to specify:
dependency/trixie-backports
with or without a version and have apt build-dep install from backports,
seems less of a burden than just specifying the version and forcing the
person building the package to work out what to do to build it.
I'm surprised this isn't an existing use case so it's more likely I just
don't know the right magic to make it work.
However, I have a workaround that doesn't need apt changes, and as my
particular usecase is for some 'archaeology' on a Jessie system, I'm not
going to investigate further right now.
Tim.
