On Wed, Dec 29, 1999 at 05:11:24PM +0000, James Troup wrote: > Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > --- dpkg-1.6.5/debian/control Fri Dec 24 19:52:56 1999 > > +++ dpkg-1.6.5.1/debian/control Tue Dec 28 16:42:05 1999 > > @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ > > Section: devel > > Priority: important > > Architecture: all > > -Depends: perl5, cpio (>= 2.4.2-2), patch (>= 2.2-1), make > > +Depends: perl5, cpio (>= 2.4.2-2), patch (>= 2.2-1), make, dpkg > > Recommends: c-compiler > > Suggests: gnupg, debian-keyring > > Conflicts: dpkgname > > @@ -44,6 +44,7 @@ > > Section: doc > > Priority: extra > > Architecture: all > > +Depends: dpkg > > Replaces: dpkg-dev (<<1.4.1.19) > > Description: Dpkg Internals Documentation > > Why? dpkg is Essential. Packages do not need to declare unversioned > dependencies on Essential packages.
It's a lintian bug workaround. It doesn't need to be there. Lintian needs to actually check that the package required isn't an essential package. Basically it comes the fact that this package uses a symlink to dpkg's doc directory. Lintian expects there to be a dep so it knows that the main package is installed. Not needed for essential though (unless of course it requires a certain version of dpkg, which AFAIK, it doesn't). -- -----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------ / Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \ ` [EMAIL PROTECTED] - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ' `---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
