Re: Is the dependency rule distribution-wise?
On Fri, 19 Feb 1999, Jules Bean wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Feb 1999, Santiago Vila wrote:
>
> > 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? [...]
It would, yes, (if we recompile also the other three standard packages
which depend on ncurses3.4), but the fact that a new upload to slink would
solve the problem does not mean this is not *currently* a problem in the
override file for slink that we should fix in either case.
The dependency rule speaks about how dependencies and priorities are
related. If we change the dependencies, we will have to examine the
priorities again, of course.
What I'm saying is that there is nothing in the policy that allows us to
downgrade the priority of ncurses3.4 *before* we recompile and reupload
the affected packages, i.e. if priorities are to be applied
distribution-wise, then it should be in potato when we demote ncurses3.4
priority.
Reply to: