Control: tag -1 - moreinfo
Hi Jidanni,
積丹尼 Dan Jacobson wrote:
> In this particular case, all I found was this package was mentioned in
> other installed packages' headers.
Thanks for this detail! And indeed, there are two types of packages
which can be seen as virtual or non-real package and it could help to
make a difference:
* Those provided by a package (can be installed, etc.) — those are
officially called "virtual" in the Debian Policy.
* Those mentioned in package relations by other packages, but not
(or no more) existing. Those exist in the dependency tree, but are
not installable. I've seen those being called "virtual" as well, but
I think that was never an official term for them. might have been a
technical thing somewhere.
> I don't know if that makes it a virtual package or not.
Both these types were also called "virtual" and I'm not sure which
terms should be used to distinguish between them. Aptitude calls the
latter usually "UNAVAILABLE" in the context of dependencies, but
something like "mentioned" or "referred to" seems more precise.
Regards, Axel
--
,''`. | Axel Beckert <a...@debian.org>, https://people.debian.org/~abe/
: :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin
`. `' | 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5
`- | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE
