On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 18:22 +0000, Roger Leigh wrote: > Yes, this might need rewording. Some people claimed it was useful for > backports, so if the backports buildds are using the aptitude resolver, > they could make use of the alternatives without any changes to > debian/control; maybe it could be better phrased, since it would > certainly work for self-built backports, or building on derivatives > etc.?
yes, think of a package that can build against libfooN or libfooN+1, but
only libfooN+1 is in unstable, and only libfooN is in stable. having a
Build-Depends: libfooN+1-dev | libfooN-dev would be a very natural thing
to do in this case. likewise in the case of a virtual libfoo-dev
libfooN-dev, which would add forward compatibility in the case of
libfooN+1-dev (providing a libfoo-dev).
sean
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
