Bug#587279: debian-policy: section 2.2.1 needs some tweaking
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 09:43:34AM +0200, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 11:49:18AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > Where does policy define the concept of 'non-default alternative' for
> > dependencies ?
> This is implied by 7.5:
> If you want to specify which of a set of real packages should be the
> default to satisfy a particular dependency on a virtual package, you
> should list the real package as an alternative before the virtual one.
> Do you think this needs to be made more explicit?
Well, this is close but, in the case we are discussing, a virtual package is not
involved (else a Provides would suffice, and the non-free package would better
Imagine a large red swirl here.