Bug#212031: marked as done (Ambiguous use of the word 'dependency')
Your message dated Fri, 07 May 2004 02:56:00 +0100
with message-id <1083894960.2803.62.camel@localhost>
and subject line Bug#212031: Ambiguous use of the word 'dependency
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 21 Sep 2003 20:18:56 +0000
>From firstname.lastname@example.org Sun Sep 21 15:18:50 2003
Received: from gemini.smart.net [220.127.116.11]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1A1AfO-0000V7-00; Sun, 21 Sep 2003 15:18:46 -0500
Received: from smart.net (IDENT:email@example.com [18.104.22.168])
by gemini.smart.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA31833;
Sun, 21 Sep 2003 16:18:44 -0400
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 16:18:24 -0400
From: "Daniel B." <firstname.lastname@example.org>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.18+dsb+smp+ide i686)
Subject: dpkg-source manual page seems to use "dependency" backwards
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by gemini.smart.net id QAA31833
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=4.0
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_9_20 (22.214.171.124-2003-03-30-exp)
The dpkg-dev manual page seems to use the word "dependency" backwards.
This error makes the documentation hard to understand.
Per the The American Heritage Dictionary (via
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=3Ddependency), a dependency
2. Something dependent or subordinate.=20
3. A territory under the jurisdiction of a state of
which it does not form an integral part.=20
The dpkg-dev manual page's uses of "dependency" in the first sense (e.g.,=
a dependency between two things, or dependency in general) are fine.
However, the uses of "dependency" in the second first seem to be=20
If A depends on B, the A is a dependency of B. B is not a dependency=20
of A (unless the dependency relationship is circular).
The manual page says:
... The dependencies are added to the substitution variables file=20
debian/substvars as variable names shlibs:dependencyfield where=20
dependency=ADfield is a dependency field name. =20
It's not clear whether that's referring to dependency in the first
sense (the information "A depends on B" is added) or the second sense
(just B is added), but if it's the second sense, it seems backwards.
The manual page says:
Include dependencies appropriate for the shared librari=
required by executable.
Add dependencies to be added to the control file
dependency field dependencyfield. (The dependen=AD
cies for this field are placed in the variable
(Roughly same comment.)
Received: (at 212031-done) by bugs.debian.org; 7 May 2004 01:56:03 +0000
>From email@example.com Thu May 06 18:56:03 2004
Received: from populous.netsplit.com (mailgate.netsplit.com) [126.96.36.199] (qmailr)
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1BLuap-0000ld-00; Thu, 06 May 2004 18:56:03 -0700
Received: (qmail 12420 invoked from network); 7 May 2004 01:56:01 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO syndicate.netsplit.com) (firstname.lastname@example.org)
by populous.netsplit.com with RC4-MD5 encrypted SMTP; 7 May 2004 01:56:01 -0000
Subject: Bug#212031: Ambiguous use of the word 'dependency
From: Scott James Remnant <email@example.com>
To: "Daniel B." <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-BSbvafPQ7VdyFqLmgsUP"
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.5.7
Date: Fri, 07 May 2004 02:56:00 +0100
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.5 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_10,HAS_BUG_NUMBER
I've gone through the dpkg documentation and our use of the word
"dependency" is consistent. We use the word to mean the following:
'a dependency of A is something that A depends on'.
This definition is wide-spread jargon in the computing world, and to my
native English (not American) reading is perfectly acceptable.
Have you ever, ever felt like this?
Had strange things happen? Are you going round the twist?
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----