On Sat, Apr 28, 2001 at 11:29:20PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > Bdale Garbee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > It isn't *quite* that simple. Explicit build dependencies should only be > > for packages that are neither essential nor build-essential. > > But it's entirely harmless to mention them; this is an area where it's > better to err on the side of liberality than frugality.
Not always. libc6, for example, is libc6.1 on Alpha. I'm sure the Hurd people have a few of their own examples. Since all the essential* and build-essential packages are listed in the build-essential package, it's easy to check if you aren't sure. * The essentials list is a little old, and it includes ldso and update, which apparently aren't build-essential anymore. Bug-report time . . . -- David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pointless website: http://dvdeug.dhis.org "I don't care if Bill personally has my name and reads my email and laughs at me. In fact, I'd be rather honored." - Joseph_Greg