Re: Is the dependency rule distribution-wise?
On Fri, 19 Feb 1999, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Feb 1999, Joseph Carter wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Feb 18, 1999 at 06:37:33PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > > Well, apparently the ftp.debian.org maintainers disagree.
> > >
> > > In slink, the info package is important, but depends on ncurses3.4 which
> > > is optional.
> >
> > info should be recompiled. =p
>
> Yes, but the dependency of slink's info on slink's ncurses3.4 is "right"
> in the sense that the dependency found in the control file matches the
> real dependency of the info binary inside the info.deb package in slink
> (i.e. info dependency in slink is the one it is).
>
> Please note that policy says:
>
> Packages may not depend on packages with lower priority values. If
> this should happen, one of the priority values will have to be
> adapted.
>
> It does not say "... or alternatively the package should be recompiled".
>
> If we are going to allow ncurses3.4 to be optional in slink, we
> should amend policy first.
However, clearly a new upload would solve the problem, no? Or do you
claim that because policy does not specifically mention that possibility
that a new upload would solve the problem, it is actually *wrong* to
upload a new version?
Of course, Brian probably won't allow a new upload. It's up to Brian to
decide whether this problem is release-critical or not.
Jules
/----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------\
| Jelibean aka | jules@jellybean.co.uk | 6 Evelyn Rd |
| Jules aka | jules@debian.org | Richmond, Surrey |
| Julian Bean | jmlb2@hermes.cam.ac.uk | TW9 2TF *UK* |
+----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------+
| War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. |
| When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. |
\----------------------------------------------------------------------/
Reply to: