On Thu, Oct 07, 1999 at 09:21:47PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Heh. That's (kinda) the next project. :)
Well, the next project turned out to be checking that source<->binary
package relationship things made sense. I think they more or less do,
although there seems to be a little cruft in the archive.
In particular, a number of binary packages could be produced from either
of two source packages:
dict-elements and dict-misc both include source for:
dict-elements.deb
(presumably dict-misc needs to be changed)
gcc and egcs both include sources for:
gcc
gpc
gpc-doc
cpp
g++
gobjc
g77
g77-doc
(arch: any; egcs seems like it can be removed)
kernel-patch-2.2.10-netwinder and kernel-source-2.2.10 both do:
kernel-headers-2.2.10
(arch: any? also missing a -netwinder, I presume)
libc5 and libc-sparc:
libc5
libc5-altdev
libc5-altdbg
(libc-sparc is arch: any instead of arch: sparc?)
irb (arch: all) and ruby (arch: any)
irb
(irb source package can be removed?)
libterm-readline-gnu-perl term-readline-gnu
libterm-readline-gun-perl
(term-readline-gnu can be removed?)
WMRack and wmrack:
wmrack
(WMRack can be removed?)
zlib and zlib1
zlib1g
zlib1g-dev
zlib-bin
zlib1
zlib1-altev
(the sparc zlib1{,-altdev} packages are based on
the zlib1 source, i386, alpha, m68k, ppc and the
remaining sparc binaries are based on zlib)
In addition, the source package egcs1.0 doesn't seem to have any of its
binaries (libstdc++2.8, libg++2.8) available for any architectures any
more.
Hmmm. dinstall doesn't seem to get rid of binary packages whose source
package disowns them, either.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. PGP encrypted mail preferred.
``The thing is: trying to be too generic is EVIL. It's stupid, it
results in slower code, and it results in more bugs.''
-- Linus Torvalds
Attachment:
pgpD8AlrYvnll.pgp
Description: PGP signature