Path: csiph.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed8.news.xs4all.nl!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr1.eu1.usenetexpress.com!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: Drew Parsons Newsgroups: linux.debian.bugs.dist,linux.debian.maint.python Subject: Bug#972213: boost1.71: Please indicate some way which python versions you support Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 10:50:02 +0200 Message-ID: References: X-Original-To: Giovanni Mascellani X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-bugs-dist-request@lists.debian.org Fri Oct 16 08:45:08 2020 Old-Return-Path: X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.2 Reply-To: dparsons@debian.org, 972213@bugs.debian.org Resent-To: debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org Resent-Cc: Debian Boost Team X-Debian-Pr-Message: followup 972213 X-Debian-Pr-Package: boost1.71 X-Debian-Pr-Source: boost1.71 X-Spam-Bayes: score:0.0000 Tokens: new, 13; hammy, 150; neutral, 68; spammy, 0. spammytokens: hammytokens:0.000-+--debianpolicy, 0.000-+--debian-policy, 0.000-+--H*o:Debian, 0.000-+--H*RU:217.70.178.242, 0.000-+--H*RU:sk:mslow2. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Organization: The Debian Project Mail-Reply-To: dparsons@debian.org X-Sender: dparsons@debian.org User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.15 X-Debian-Message: from BTS X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1627591 List-ID: List-URL: Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 37 Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Cc: 972213@bugs.debian.org, debian-python@lists.debian.org X-Original-Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 16:19:59 +0800 X-Original-Message-ID: <8afe0d5de795f9b7527155d025857a68@debian.org> X-Original-References: <160268352629.28072.10388202521171168675.reportbug@mail.sceal.ie> <160280958293.174864.15697454085967198930.reportbug@monte.emerall.com> <160268352629.28072.10388202521171168675.reportbug@mail.sceal.ie> Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.bugs.dist:1028821 linux.debian.maint.python:12944 On 2020-10-16 14:43, Giovanni Mascellani wrote: > Hi, > > Il 16/10/20 02:53, Drew Parsons ha scritto: >> >> Would it make sense to use the Built-Using [1] header? ... >> [1] >> https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-relationships.html#additional-source-packages-used-to-build-the-binary-built-using > > The precise web page you are linking hints that this use of Built-Using > would be improper: > > "This field should be used only when there are license or DFSG > requirements to retain the referenced source packages. It should not be > added solely as a way to locate packages that need to be rebuilt > against > newer versions of their build dependencies". Ah yes, I had a feeling there were more reasons to not prefer this method! > That said, I forgot to mention that the Python versions Boost is > compiled against is also tracked in the package names provided by > libboost-python1.71.0, which are currently libboost-python1.71.0-py38 > and libboost-python1.71-py39. > > Is this better? More in general, there can be dozens of ways to > advertise which Python versions are used to build Boost.Python, but it > is not clear to me how this information should be consumed. That sounds like a useful approach. The ecflow build could access the provided versions via dpkg -s libboost-python${BOOST_VERSION} | grep Provides