On February 12, 2018 4:55:09 PM EST, Philipp Kern <pk...@debian.org> wrote:
>On 02/12/2018 10:16 PM, Afif Elghraoui wrote:
>> Besides unnecessary repetition in d/control, lying to the build
>server in telling it that it needs a package in order to build could
>cause unnecesssary problems in bootstrapping.
>
>Well, but we're running a real-world system here. In an optimal world
>these runtime dependencies would be build dependencies because unit
>tests would run the code and depend on the libraries being present.

And for those situations, we have the nocheck build profile to allow building 
without running the test suite if necessary.

>Alas, sometimes that's not possible and packages are still not going to
>be useful (or installable) on architectures where those dependencies
>are
>missing. Making them explicit as build dependencies avoids having
>useless, uninstallable packages on those architectures.
>
>So it's about trade-offs and I think Julien's right.

All I was asking for is to have the run-time dependencies (at least the 
explicitly specified ones; the autogenerated ones usually come from 
Build-Depends anyway) checked before starting the build for exactly the reason 
you're mentioning.

Based on what you and Julien are saying, I guess I should copy them and use 
<!nocheck>.

regards
Afif

Reply via email to