Re: It is ok to have a hardcoded Depends: libc6-dev ?
Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es> writes:
> But I'm still in doubt about the need of a depends line at all.
I'm not.
> To compile *anything*, you will need libc6-dev anyway,
Not necessarily, prior to the C-ified dependency generator, the kernel
was self-contained enough (obviously using only make configure, not
the ncurses or X versions) that you didn't need libc6-dev to compile
it.
> so what is the purpose of libfoo-dev depending on libc6-dev?
Because indirect dependencies are evil (see archives of this list).
What exactly is the problem with glibc2-dev providing libc6-dev?
(Apart from the fact that you find it aesthetically displeasing). The
alpha people do it and it works for them.
[For that matter, why even change the name of such a core package?
Seems gratuitous to me.]
--
James
Reply to: