On 29 July 2017 at 23:38, Daniel Schepler <dschep...@gmail.com> wrote: > Source: boost1.62 > Version: 1.62.0+dfsg-4 > Severity: wishlist > > Currently, src:boost1.62 Build-Depends on mpi-default-dev, which > creates a build dependency cycle: > > mpi-defaults Build-Depends on libopenmpi-dev > openmpi Build-Depends on libhwloc-dev > hwloc Build-Depends on libcairo2-dev > cairo Build-Depends on libglib2.0-dev > glib2.0 Build-Depends on gtk-doc-tools > gtk-doc-tools Depends on highlight > highlight Build-Depends on libboost-dev > boost-defaults Build-Depends on libboost1.62-dev > > It would be nice if the boost1.* source packages could provide a build > profile to allow for building without boost-mpi - and then, of course, > the same for src:boost-defaults. (Actually, in my experience, just > having the pure header package available tends to be enough for > bootstrapping purposes - but I also don't see any real reason for > dropping any of the other binary library packages in a stage1 > bootstrap build.) >
debian/rules had support for build without mpi, as that was kept separate in Ubuntu for main vs universe, before we allowed for source packages in main, to have build-dependencies from universe, as long as binaries depends are self-contained in main. So implementing this should be easy enoug: resurrect the non-mpi build code, tweak it to be build-profile sensitive. There was the whole lot there - targets to regenerated control without mpi packages, and do non-mpi build, just-mpi build, or build everything (the current default). > It would also be good if doxygen could be moved to > Build-Depends-Indep, as doxygen Build-Depends on default-jdk, and > openjdk also requires several glib-based libraries. I'm not sure if doxygen is still needed, as documentation build has been broken for a while. However, I'm not sure if one can do a build without doxygen, needs checking. -- Regards, Dimitri.
