On Mon, Jul 05, 1999 at 10:47:09AM -0700, Darren O. Benham wrote:
> Is there a policy ruling n this?
I doubt it, however...
> > > E: gstep-base-dbg: usr-doc-symlink-without-dependency gstep-base
> > >
> > > gstep-base-dbg depends on gstep-base-dev, which depends on gstep-base,
> > > so linitian misses this indirect dependency on gstep-base.
> >
> > I don't think policy allows this kind of indirect dependency, actually:
> >
> > /usr/doc/<package-name> may be a symbolic link to a directory in
> > /usr/doc only if two packages both come from the same source and the
> > first package has a "Depends" relationship on the second. These rules
> > are important because copyrights must be extractable by mechanical
> > means.
>
> The wording seems to forbid this, but the indirect links don't violate
> the rationale (still extractable by mechanical means).
What happens when gstep-base-dev no longer depends on gstep-base?
Granted that isn't going to happen here, however that it could happen
theoretically is a good reason to require direct dependency IMO. Given
that the dependency is there anyway this doesn't hurt much.
--
Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@debian.org> Debian GNU/Linux developer
PGP: E8D68481E3A8BB77 8EE22996C9445FBE The Source Comes First!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
<apt> it has been said that redhat is the thing Marc Ewing wears on
his head.
Attachment:
pgpBCMPyMFIyn.pgp
Description: PGP signature