El 4/1/23 a las 2:32, Sam Hartman escribió:
"Santiago" == Santiago Vila <sanvila@debian.org> writes:Santiago> As an example, packages tzdata, mount or e2fsprogs are not Santiago> build-essential and afaik have not been for a long time, Santiago> but there are still people who believe that they are Santiago> build-essential for the mere fact that they are Santiago> priority:required. Why not just make all required packages build-essential? I agree we should fix the class of bugs you are talking about, but it seems like in some cases it might be easier to fix them by declaring them not buggy.
Because required to build != required in a _running_ system The idea of declaring something not a bug to avoid fixing it is not very appealing to me. I believe we can do better than that. The proposal made in bug #837060 (namely, that debootstrap stops installing packages not build essential when using the buildd profile) is IMO the optimal way to fix the problem at its root, because once that packages with missing build-depends start failing in the buildds, then it will be clear for everybody that there is a missing build-depends. (The initial email in such bug by Johannes Schauer describes the problem very well). Thanks.