> > So how does this all sound to you guys?
> Well, it sounds like you repeated what about a dozen people have already
> said. The concern is an automated way to generate the depends. The
> autobuilders already use a semi-working type of this, but it isn't perfect
> and makes assumptions that can't always be assumed.
> I have already made a patch for dpkg-* programs to use source deps in a
> control field, that's not the problem though.
As this has probably been thrashed about innumerable times before, yet we
all agree that having source dependancies would be valuable, could someone
summarise (or provide a pointer to) the problems that have been identified.
I see two situations up front:
- a need to describe the tools needed to build a package
(eg. gcc, bison, flex, etc..)
- and a need to describe the other source packages or librarys required
to build a working binary.
as well as a way to auto-detect these dependancies, what else is required?