Re: symlinks and transitive dependencies?
>>>>> On Sat, 25 Apr 1998 02:41:06 -0500, Branden Robinson <branden@purdue.edu> said:
Branden> [1 <text/plain; us-ascii (8bit)>] Is this okay?
Branden> 3 packages, A, B, and C.
Branden> B depends on A. C depends on B.
Branden> B has a symlink to a directory in A. C has a symlink to the
Branden> same directory in A, rather than a symlink to the symlink in
Branden> B which points to the directory in A.
Branden> Lintian complains about this: E: xslibg:
Branden> usr-doc-symlink-without-dependency xlib6g
Branden> Is it okay to do this with a transitive dependency? I don't
Branden> see why not; it reduces the number of symlinks that must be
Branden> traversed to get to the final destination.
Why not make C depend on B and A. Then the problem is solved. (with
unallowed transitive dependencies)
Dres
--
@James LewisMoss <dres@dimensional.com> | Blessed Be!
@ http://www.dimensional.com/~dres | Linux is kewl!
@"Argue for your limitations and sure enough, they're yours." Bach
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: