fabrice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (05/11/2008): > As I added dependency on enfuse, which only exists since 3.2, it's a > kind of an implicit dependency with 3.2.
No. That'll make sure that the source package used to build this package was 3.2; not that you're installing a 3.2 version of enblend (think of having e.g. unstable + experimental repositories, both enblend 3.0 and 3.2 will be available, and nothing will force you to pick 3.2). Of course, if enfuse depended on enblend >= 3.2, that would be another story… > But you are right: it's better to have it clearly identify as depend > on 3.2 … and I would still go for the explicit dependency, too. Mraw, KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
