On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 02:02:15PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 12:41:21PM +0200, Bas Wijnen wrote:
> > It would be nice if lintian would complain about improper or missing
> > dependencies for -data packages. That is, if both $package and
> > $package-data are defined in debian/control, $package should have
> > Depends: $package-data (= ${source:version})
>
> Huh? May it should or maybe not. There is really no way to tell...
Well, by convention -data packages are just the arch: all parts of the
package. In general, there is a hard dependency on it. Perhaps not
always, but then the packages are at least confusingly named. And if
there is a good reason, it is so rare (I expect) that an override is in
order. Or do you see "normal" cases where such a depends is not needed?
> > Perhaps there should also be a warning if $package-data does not have
> > Recommends: $package
> > (with any version, I suppose.)
>
> Why not Suggests? Why any at all?
Assuming still that the -data package just contains arch: all parts of
the other one, it is useless without the other one. So it will only be
installed without it in very unusual situations, which is what
Recommends is for.
Thanks,
Bas
--
I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader.
Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text
in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word.
Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either.
For more information, see http://pcbcn10.phys.rug.nl/e-mail.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature