Hi Nicolas,
On 2019-03-12 02:21, Nicolas Braud-Santoni wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 12:31:42AM +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
>> This needs a lot of more work :-(
>>
>> * is this usage of --link-doc valid? the packages don't have a strictly
>> versioned Depends: lirc (= ${binary:version}), so I can install *only*
>> liblirc0 and have a dangling /usr/share/doc/liblirc0 and e.g. no
>> copyright file
>
> Right, that should have been liblirc0 (which they all depend on, transitively,
> except for lirc-doc). However, I now noticed an interaction with lirc-doc
> which
> makes --link-doc particularly unadvisable (see below).
I didn't spot anything obviously broken in the new diff. Just to verify
again, the package currently has broken symlinks that are going to be
replaced by files, not directories? (Otherwise you would still need some
symlink_to_dir.)
Thanks!
Andreas
