Bug#212034: Debian Perl Policy manual uses "dependency" backwards

[Chris Waters <xtifr@debian.org>]

On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 08:57:16PM -0400, Daniel B. wrote:

> Since the other package is not dependent on perl, then by your own
> dictionary's definition, the other package is not a dependency of 
> perl.  (Any divergence between us yet?)

This is your point of error.  The dependency belongs to perl, that's
why it's a dependency OF perl's.  If the other package had the
dependency, then it would be a dependency ON perl, not "of".

I am dependent on coffee, therefore coffee is a dependency of mine.

Strictly speaking, I think there may be a missing "'s" in perl policy
there, i.e. it should say, "a dependency of perl's", not "a dependency
of perl", but the meaning doesn't actually change.  It's just a little
more awkward (and somewhat more colloquial) the way it's currently
phrased.

cheers
-- 
Chris Waters           |  Pneumonoultra-        osis is too long
xtifr@debian.org       |  microscopicsilico-    to fit into a single
or xtifr@speakeasy.net |  volcaniconi-          standalone haiku