On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 11:49:18AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 12:45:49AM -0500, Raphael Geissert wrote:
> > On Monday 19 July 2010 11:26:38 Russ Allbery wrote:
> > > diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
> > > index 0b3c1a1..06c1fdc 100644
> > > --- a/policy.sgml
> > > +++ b/policy.sgml
> > > @@ -476,9 +476,12 @@
> > > <item>
> > > must not require a package outside of <em>main</em>
> > > for compilation or execution (thus, the package must
> > > - not declare a "Depends", "Recommends", or
> > > - "Build-Depends" relationship on a non-<em>main</em>
> > > - package),
> > > + not declare a <tt>Pre-Depends</tt>, <tt>Depends</tt>,
> > > + <tt>Recommends</tt>, <tt>Build-Depends</tt>,
> > > + or <tt>Build-Depends-Indep</tt> relationship on a
> > > + non-<em>main</em> package unless that package is only
> > > + listed as a non-default alternative for a package
> > > + in <em>main</em),
> > > </item>
> > > <item>
> > > must not be so buggy that we refuse to support them,
> 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?
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature