[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: stupid dependencies on update-inetd



On Jul 29, Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> wrote:

> So is anything ever valid other than openbsd-inetd | inet-superserver as a
> dependency?  I keep getting confused on the rules around using virtual
> packages.  Would rlinetd | inet-superserver be okay?  Would
Formally yes, but I do not think there is a reason for a package to
choose a different default.

> inet-superserver all by itself be okay?
No, but this would be taken care of by
virtual-package-depends-without-real-package-depends (which explains
the part you are missing).

-- 
ciao,
Marco

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: