* Eugen Dedu ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Eric Dorland wrote: >> * Eugen Dedu ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> IIUC a required package, such as procps, does not need to be included in >>> Depends, such of iceweasel's Depends. >> From 3.5 of the Policy Manual: >> "Packages are not required to declare any dependencies they have on >> other packages which are marked Essential (see below), and should not >> do so unless they depend on a particular version of that package." >> procps is not marked Essential AFAIK. Thanks for keeping your eyes >> peeled though. > > You're right. But for ex. libc6 is not essential, should (nearly) each > program depend on it??? Essential deals with unconfigured (and working) > packages, not with required (or not) packages. It's bizarre to me.
It is a bit weird that libc6 isn't marked Essential, that might be a bug. I suppose it is transitively essential since essential packages depend on it. Even if it was essential most packages would still need to depend on libc6 explicitly because they need a versioned dependency on it and not just "libc6". Perhaps libc6 doesn't work until it's configured? -- Eric Dorland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ICQ: #61138586, Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1024D/16D970C6 097C 4861 9934 27A0 8E1C 2B0A 61E9 8ECF 16D9 70C6
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
