Bug#296175: package depends on itself

[Nicolas Boullis]

Hi,

On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 08:46:22AM +0100, Lo=EFc Minier wrote:

>  That's a pity, any way fixing the deps in on the todo list.  Let's hop=
e
>  it was it.

Yes, I agree that unreproducible bugs are quite problematic. I'll try to=20
rebuild a similar configuration in a woody pbuilder, but it certainly=20
won't be easy....


> > (I've seen in a bug report that you temporarily merged with this one=20
> > that you consider that circular dependencies are alright. Reading the=
=20
> > same section of policy, I think the are not.)
>=20
>  I think circular dependencies are perfectly right, especially for
>  packages such as galeon/galeon-common.

Well, I gave you my reasoning why I think circular dependencies=20
(including self-dependencies) are broken. Where do you think my=20
reasoning is wrong?

Moreover, although I don't know much about the galeon/galeon-common=20
situation, I don't think foo-common depends on foo any more than a=20
library depends on a binary that uses it...


Cheers,

Nicolas