Frank Küster wrote: > Wouldn't it make more sense, then, to include explicitly "| cdebconf (>= > $whatnot)"?
No, all versions of cdebconf implement version 2.0 of the debconf
protocol, and there's no reason that there can't be a third package
implenting the protocol.
> Actually, this means that any package that depends on a
> newer version of debconf will be broken if it uses ${misc:Depends}.
I'd suggest conflicting with versions of debconf that don't work with
your package in this case.
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
