Hi again, [...] > > B _does_ depend on C(A), if A is installed. >
So B depends on ( A & C(A) ) | something-else > > ... time passes ... > > > > magic install C(A) ??? > > > > > > Isn't all you want a hard dependency of dkms on both the Linux kernel and > > its header package? It seems that right now this is just a Recommends. > > Could you maybe elaborate why a proper Depends: is not appropriate in your > > opinion? > > > > Its not any header package: dkms needs the _appropriate_ header > package matching the installed kernel package. If > linux-image-2.6.39-1-amd64 is installed, then dkms needs > linux-headers-2.6.39-1-amd64. If linux-image-3.0-1-amd64 is > installed in parallel, then dkms needs linux-headers-3.0-1-amd64, > too. > > Its just an example, anyway. > Isn't all you want (with l-i-1 = linux-image-2.6.39-1-amd64, l-h-2 = linux-headers-3.0-1-amd64, etc.) Depends: (l-i-1, l-h-1) | (l-i-2, l-h-2) | ... And yes, that's not allowed. You need to convert that to CNF. Doable, but results in a blow-up of the expression size. Hence what you want is Depends: dkms-l-1 | dkms-l-2 with additional (almost empty) packages dkms-l-1 for 2.6.39 and dkms-l-2 for 3.0.1, where Package: dkms-l-1 Depends: l-i-1, l-h-1 Package: dkms-l-2 Depends: l-i-2, l-h-2 Best, Michael
pgp3HfrEUq7iQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
