SDL producing bogus dependencies or packages misusing SDL?

I wanted to verify this. I've been looking at a number of packages which have picked up dependencies on libartsc0, libasound2, libaudio2, libaudiofile0, libsed0, libjpeg62, libpng12-0, and many others, without actually build-depending on any of the corresponding dev packages. The common factor

Re: SDL producing bogus dependencies or packages misusing SDL?

On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 10:32:00PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote: I wanted to verify this. I've been looking at a number of packages which have picked up dependencies on libartsc0, libasound2, libaudio2, libaudiofile0, libsed0, libjpeg62, libpng12-0, and many others, without actually