[Build-common-hackers] Re: circular dependency fun
Fri, 3 Oct 2003 15:59:30 -0400 (EDT)
On Fri, 3 Oct 2003, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 14:11, Jeff Bailey wrote:
> > I don't think it is. Debian is full of these circular dependancies -
> > The ability to simply bootstrap the system isn't a release requirement -
> > Which is good, because taken to an extreme, you need gcc to build gcc.
> > I think we might already accomidate this by coping gracefully if
> > springgraph isn't there.
> Yep, exactly. More specifically my vague rule is that the actual
> requirements are listed on the first line of the Build-Depends (right
> now just debhelper); everything after it is noncritical and can be
> safely deleted. (If that doesn't work, it's definitely a bug).
I tend to agree and that's why I didn't file a bug report. I think it is
up to the package maintainers to work these things out or possibly decide
that they can't be avoided in some cases. I know of nothing in policy that
mandates a bug report for this. My intention in emailing the package
maintainers was to make them aware of a situation that can sometimes lead
up to real bugs.