If you know, or suspect, that some might not do then make that knowledge explicit (at least by not listing all similar packages). All the packages providing *tags are probably pretty equivalent, but yacc, byacc, bison etc. have differences that mean that some grammars are not acceptable to all of those.
Should we require in policy that sources have a text file explaining the dependencies. This would be a natural place for telling whether all of the 'equivalent' packages do or not. t.aa Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Fri Nov 12, 1999 11:25 PM > > On Fri, Nov 12, 1999 at 08:13:54PM +0000, David Coe wrote: > > Yacc and ctags are provided by many different packages, and managed > > by update-alternatives, but there is no virtual package > corresponding > > to either of them. > ... > > What should I do? Thanks. > > Contact the maintainers of such packages and propose a new virtual > package, then kick that to the policy group. > > In the meantime, either choose one or two randomly or list them all > yourself.
