On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 04:40:08PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > On Mon, May 31, 2004 at 11:55:21PM +0200, Rafael Laboissiere wrote: > > * Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-05-31 14:32]: > > > > > No problem. /usr/share/doc/$pkg/copyright is the reason. As the > > > copyright notice is one of the most important files in a package (at > > > least seen from a legal pov) we have to ensure that it is always > > > right. This is only possible if both packages come from the same source > > > package and the same source version. We still have a little problem in > > > those cases where the version of a binary package differs from the > > > version of another binary package linking its /usr/share/doc/dir to it. > > > > The goal of detecting incoherences in the copyright files is very noble, but > > Hm, we trust to the maintainers to get this kind of dependencies right > in most cases... That is, a depends on the latest significantly (that > is, incompatible) changed version, and conflict on the latest > incompatible package. > > copyright files don't change that often, is it really needed to demand a > strict depends?
Based also on the referred d-d thread, I'm tending to revert the extra check introduced at the request of #201470 Once lintian supports proper cross-package checking, this test can be made perfect, by simply checking whether the copyright file is indeed identical. --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl
