* 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
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature