[buildd-tools-devel] Bug#844267: Bug#844267: sbuild: Support for blhc

[Paul Wise]

On Mon, 2016-11-14 at 08:30 +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote:

> why do you have to supply the exact version as well?

Otherwise the wrong package could get installed:

.../check-all-the-things (master=) $ git grep -h ^apt.= | sed s/apt.=.// | grep '[^-a-z0-9, ]'
cypher-lint (>= 0.3.4)
cme | libconfig-model-perl (<< 2.063), libconfig-model-dpkg-perl
fontforge-nox | fontforge
licensecheck | devscripts (<< 2.16.6~)
devscripts, devscripts (>= 2.13.1~) | python-magic, devscripts (<< 2.13.1~) | python3-magic
licensecheck | devscripts (<< 2.16.6~)
licensecheck | devscripts (<< 2.16.6~)
clang-modernize-3.5
php-cli | php5-cli
pyflakes (>= 0.7.3)
pyflakes3 | pyflakes (>= 0.7.3), pyflakes3 | pyflakes (<< 1.1.0-1)
pylint (>= 1.1.0)
pylint3 (>= 1.1.0)
python3-bashate | python-bashate
python3-restructuredtext-lint | python-restructuredtext-lint
python3-doc8 | python-doc8

> you could do it like sbuild and ... create a dummy binary package

That is a bit ugly IMO, I would prefer #275379 to get implemented.

> Alternatively, sbuild would be happy with parsing the .dsc you already provide
> and pass the contents of the Build-Depends field to apt.

That would work for sbuild because build-essential is installed in
build chroots, but not for cats more generally.

-- 
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/buildd-tools-devel/attachments/20161114/31f24773/attachment.sig>