Re: Dependency logic
On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 09:46:03AM -0500, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
> In a post to this list about a year ago, someone suggested that complex
> dependencies such as "(A & B) | C" be handled with: "A | C, B | C". Now
> this generates a lintian error:
> E: petsc2.1.1-dev: package-has-a-duplicate-relation blas-dev |
> atlas2-base-dev, lapack-dev | atlas2-base-dev
> N: The package seems to declare a relation on another package which is
> N: already implied by other relations it declares, and is therefore
> N: redundant. This is not only sloppy but can break some tools
> How else am I supposed to construct this dependency?
That seems to be a bug in lintian (see also #122742). I wrote the
current iteration of that check, so I'll take a look at it. In the
meantime I think you can just ignore it.
Colin Watson [firstname.lastname@example.org]