* Russ Allbery <r...@debian.org>, 2010-07-07, 09:12:
+           <item>
+             The packages are the same version (both source and Debian
+             revision) with the possible exception of binary-only
+             rebuilds of one of the packages, since otherwise
+             the <file>changelog.Debian.gz</file> in one of the two
+             packages would not be the changelog for the latest version.
+             This requires a dependency that ensures exactly the right
+             version of the other package be installed.  For a dependency
+             between two binary-dependent packages, use:
+             <example>
+Depends: foo (= ${binary:Version})
+             </example>
+             For a dependency between two architecture-independent
+             packages or from an architecture-dependent package to an
+             architecture-independent package, use:
+             <example>
+Depends: foo (= ${source:Version})
+             </example>
+             Putting the symlink in an architecture-independent package
+             and the documentation directory in an architecture-dependent
+             package should be avoided if the documentation can be moved
+             to an architecture-independent package instead, but if
+             required, a dependency similar to:
+             <example>
+Depends: foo (>= ${source:Version}), foo (<< ${source:Version}+b99)
+             </example>
+             can be used.
+           </item>

This encourages arch:any -> arch:all symlinks, which is exactly what I wanted to be disallowed.

--
Jakub Wilk

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to