Bug#354507: libkpathsea3 should be removed

[Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>]

> Hello Adrian,

Hello Frank,

first of all sorry for my late answer.

>...
> So okay, I think that we might get rid of libkpathsea3 faster if we
> rename libkpathsea4-dev to libkpathsea-dev, and request binary NMUs if
> needed.  But there's one thing left I'm not sure about:
> 
> If the tetex-bin source package provides a libkpathsea-dev binary
> package, doesn't that mean that the libkpathsea3 source package, which
> provides the same binary package, must disappear from the respecitve
> distribution? 

AFAIR such movings of a binary package from one source package to 
another are handled correctly without a need for the old source package 
to disappear.

>...
> [1] I don't know whether the testing scripts actually check for
> satisfied Build-Dependencies, but I think we shouldn't deliberately
> break them.

The testing scripts completely ignore build dependencies, and it's 
therefore quite common that there are many packages in testing whose 
build dependencies can't be fulfilled inside testing.

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed