On Wed, May 30, 2007 14:13, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Johan Walles, le Wed 30 May 2007 15:01:32 +0200, a écrit : >> Somebody who understands this better than me, please close this bug or >> explain why it should still be open. > > Mmm, I'd say the explanation given by Michael still holds?
And I'd point that libc6-dev depends on linux-libc-dev (formerly linux-kernel-headers) which is priority optional, and looks like exactly the same situation. I'm wondering if this point of the policy should be ignored for the specific case of libc-dev depending on the kernel headers, whatever the kernel is (so the same would apply for kfreebsd). Regis