On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 07:39:09PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 05:50:26PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote: > As a technicality, depending on libc-dev is wrong because there is > always *one* *specific* real package that fulfills the proper > relationship on each architecture. Uh, no, it's not, it's perfectly correct. That line in policy is only there so dselect (originally) and apt-get can sensibly select the correct default. In dselect's case (I'm not sure about apt-get), it's not even necessary if you've got one of the packages that provides the virtual package at a higher priority than all the others -- that one will be automatically chosen for you. In the past, this hasn't always been the case, with both info and emacs19 being priority:standard and providing info-browser, eg. > You cannot substitute a different > -dev package for libc6.1 on an alpha and get correct results. There aren't (and should not be) different -dev packages on alpha to substitute, whether or not there's a provides. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.''
Attachment:
pgpC3BxdYd8MT.pgp
Description: PGP signature