Quoting Guillem Jover (2016-02-04 09:44:13)
> On Sun, 2016-01-31 at 14:43:08 +0100, Jérémy Bobbio wrote:
> > and “Installed-Build-Depends” for the list of packages?
> I asked for more suggestions on #debian-dpkg, and Johannes Schauer
> suggested Transitive-Build-Depends, which is something I had in mind
> too (that or «Recursive-»), but kind of softly discarded in trying to
> have a consistently namespaced «Build-» field name. :) Some of the
> reasons Johannes put forward are that this name is better because it
> clearly describes what's the exact purpose of the field, and gives
> no room for misinterpretation. And if we had to change the algorithm
> we could just use a new name. All of which I concur with.

maybe we can merge Lunar's original suggestion Installed-Build-Depends (a name
which is missing the transitive/recursive-ness) with the new suggestion and
make it:


This way it would not be confused with the *actual* transitive build depends
which would also include non-installed ones or even non-installable ones
because parts of the transitive build depends set might conflict with each

One could also argue that the recorded build dependencies being the installed
as well as transitive ones is quite implicit and thus neither needs to be
mentioned as part of the field.

just my 2 cents

cheers, josch

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: signature

Reproducible-builds mailing list

Reply via email to