Re: Netatalk and SSL

[Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net>]

Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen@err.no> writes:

> Package: foo
> Depends libfoo, libc6
>
> Package: libfoo
> Depends: libbar | libbar-ssl, libc6
>
> Package: libbar
> Depends: libc6
>
> Package: libbar-ssl
> Depends: libc6, libssl
>
> (Assume that foo, libfoo and libbar are all licenced under the GPL,
> libbar with a licence exception allowing it to be linked to openssl.
> Also assume that libbar and libbar-ssl are ABI-compatible.)
>
> Is this allowed?  If not, why not?  Would it be allowed if the package
> stanza for libfoo read:
>
> Package: libfoo
> Depends: libbar-ssl | libbar, libc6

What matters is not what the Debian package dependencies look like,
but the shared library dependencies in the programs themselves.