Hi Graham, I hope this is my last comment in this bug ;)
On 11-10-13 17:37, Graham Inggs wrote: > I agree that in most cases you would want the symlinks in the package > that provides the target files. > I think an exception would be where there is not a strong dependence > (either way) between the package providing the target files and the > package that needs, or makes use of, the symlinks. I that case, I think > the symlinks should go in the package that uses them. Hmm, and in that case *I* would say they go (similar to the general case) into the package that provides the files. So that it is clear which package actually provides that "functionality". See the bug mentioned below for an other example in your direction, however. Seems like this is a matter of taste. Anyway, why does dx need/use the symlink if it can, apparently, function well without the data. > Also, in the dx package there are several symlinks located in > /usr/lib/dx, I feel having all of these in the dx package rather than > some in dx, some in dx-doc and some in dxsamples makes the most sense. Yes, but apart from thinking about how you would like it to be, you are here also changing the way it used to be. This always has additional risks, so usually, I would only do it if it would bring real benefits. We already saw the potential risk when it was forgotten to declare the proper replaces/breaks. > In my case, dx recommends dx-doc and suggests dxsamples. I have not > checked, but it seems as if the Lintian tag does not follow recommends > and suggests dependencies, only depends. I think due to the default behavior in Debian, checking in Recommends makes lots of sense. I am not too sure about Suggests. But please, in case you persist, override the lintian warning, and note the lintian bug. > Do you think I should file a bug against Lintian querying this? I already did a long time ago :) http://bugs.debian.org/683059 Maybe YOU want to add a note about Suggests. Paul
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
