Re: Questions about package dependencies with no upstream version

To: debian-mentors@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Questions about package dependencies with no upstream version
From: Andrey Rakhmatullin <wrar@wrar.name>
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 17:44:08 +0100
Message-id: <[🔎] ZVzeWNhVv-_ITKPM@durkon.wrar.name>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] JHaOmMRhKBoZKDLPS3p0Y_I724jxzZFUswft9PYETPOUCOFJfko-EeCiAyx6unAEzTv62lQ3CXKOFFIK-rdWkxZ14KxP7RVYipt1srs9pzY=@proton.me>
References: <[🔎] JHaOmMRhKBoZKDLPS3p0Y_I724jxzZFUswft9PYETPOUCOFJfko-EeCiAyx6unAEzTv62lQ3CXKOFFIK-rdWkxZ14KxP7RVYipt1srs9pzY=@proton.me>

On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 04:39:42PM +0000, David James wrote:
> A couple of these dependencies have no version upstream. Is there a
> precedent for this? Can these dependencies be packaged?
There are definitely packages like that in Debian and the usual practice
is using date-based versions, probably something like 0+20231121.

Reply to:

References:
- Questions about package dependencies with no upstream version
  - From: David James <davidjamescastor215@proton.me>

Prev by Date: Questions about package dependencies with no upstream version
Next by Date: Re: Questions about package dependencies with no upstream version
Previous by thread: Questions about package dependencies with no upstream version
Next by thread: Re: Questions about package dependencies with no upstream version
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread