Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > But I'm still in doubt about the need of a depends line at all.
I'm not. > To compile *anything*, you will need libc6-dev anyway, Not necessarily, prior to the C-ified dependency generator, the kernel was self-contained enough (obviously using only make configure, not the ncurses or X versions) that you didn't need libc6-dev to compile it. > so what is the purpose of libfoo-dev depending on libc6-dev? Because indirect dependencies are evil (see archives of this list). What exactly is the problem with glibc2-dev providing libc6-dev? (Apart from the fact that you find it aesthetically displeasing). The alpha people do it and it works for them. [For that matter, why even change the name of such a core package? Seems gratuitous to me.] -- James
