On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 05:43:42PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > Changes: > zlib (1:1.1.4-6) unstable; urgency=low > . > * Depend on libc-dev rather than libc6-dev (closes: #164649). > > So of course this package is going to be uninstallable now, just like openssl > was a few days ago. > > openssl (0.9.6g-8) unstable; urgency=low > . > * fix libc6 depends. Only needed for i386 (closes: #163701) > * remove SHLIB section for bsds from Configure (closes: #163585) > > openssl (0.9.6g-9) unstable; urgency=low > . > * fix typo in i386 libc6 depend (sigh) (closes: #163848) > > DO NOT DECLARE SIMPLE DEPENDENCIES ON PURE VIRTUAL PACKAGES. > > In Debian GNU/Linux, "libc-dev" is a pure virtual package. It doesn't > matter if "libc-dev" is a real package on GNU/Hurd or *BSD. You will > break Debian GNU/Linux if you tell people to change "libc6-dev" > dependencies to "libc-dev". > > WHAT YOU SHOULD DO INSTEAD: > > Depends: libc6-dev | libc-dev > > This also helps the Alpha and IA-64 GNU/Linux ports, where the dev > package for GNU LibC is "libc6.1-dev". > > DEPENDING ON A VIRTUAL PACKAGE IS FINE, BUT YOU SHOULD *ALWAYS* SPECIFY > A REAL PACKAGE ALTERNATIVE, AND IT SHOULD *ALWAYS* COME FIRST. > > REAL BEFORE VIRTUAL. > > Learn it, live it, love it. > > Oh yeah, by the way... > > I WOULDN'T HAVE TO SHOUT LIKE THIS IF PACKAGE MAINTAINERS COULD BE > BOTHERED TO PERFORM EVEN THE MEAGER TESTING THAT "dpkg -i" ENTAILS. > > TEST BEFORE YOU UPLOAD. 1) As said on IRC... I stand corrected, and will attempt to avoid encouraging mistakes in the future (once I can hear again). 2) Is this a libc6 special case, or would it be just as acceptable to list, say, "libc12-dev | libc-dev"? 3) If the answer to #2 is 'no', can someone explain to me, in private, why pure virtual dependancies are bad, then? They seem like the obvious answer, so if they're not, I'd like to understand why. (note #1, above, and that this is a request for enlightenment, not an argument). -- *************************************************************************** Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com lucifer@lightbearer.com http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/
Attachment:
pgpkno3UlS4tN.pgp
Description: PGP signature