also sprach Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.09.07.1944 +0200]: > I don't feel that this is the right fix. It just moves the > dependency info from the control file to the rules file, which > doesn't feel like any benefit.
Well, something like -V of dh_perl; then I could specify a versioned
build-dep on debconf... would you consider this?
Other replies follow:
> * Add a flag to debhelper to make a command not add misc:Depends, which
> can be turned on when needed. (ie, when you're specifying a tighter
> dependency in the control file)
> * Split up misc:Depends. However, this last one doesn't seem very viable
> since then you'd have to renember to add ${debconf:Depends} etc etc.
I can do both of these now simply by not using misc:Depends and
hoping to follow all changes. However, you'll understand if I say
this is not the favourable solution.
> * Modify dpkg-deb or something to remove redundant dependencies, so
> if a package depends on debconf (>= 0.5) (misc:Depends) and debconf
> (>= 1.4.72) (control), the deb only carries the higher dependency.
> * Decide that redundant dependencies are not actually a problem and
> leave them in. (Note that lintian doesn't warn about them.)
Sure...
> * Make debhelper's dependency adding code smarter so it doesn't add the
> lower-versioned redundant dependency in the first place.
This seems like one way to do it.
Thanks for your reply.
--
.''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: :' : proud Debian developer, author, administrator, and user
`. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck - http://debiansystem.info
`- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)
