Hello thread! /me puts on a package manager developer hat. Sorry, I haven't read the whole thread, it's huge. I think that diversion of debug packages out of current deb format is a completely wrong direction. Do you want to teach all tools that get some info about Debian packages that there is new 'ddeb' format packages? New .ddeb extension? For a what sake? Oh, no, and this covers not 3 packages. Let's count. The following command counts reverse {predepends,depends,recommends} to apt (which contains libapt-pkg) and to libcupt: $ cupt rdepends apt libcupt-perl 2>/dev/null | grep Reverse | wc -l 63 To extract the info 'is this debug package?' you can use a good and easy regular expression '.*-debug$' applied to package name (or any other suffix you want). Are there other reasons? [Roger Leigh] > I see no reason why they > can't be first-class Debian packages Fully agree. While I support automatic generation of debug packages, creating a new format for them sounds for me as creating new RFC for e-mails which bodies contain no spaces and no Bcc header allowed. Why? To filter 'automatic debug mails'. -- Eugene V. Lyubimkin aka JackYF, JID: jackyf.devel(maildog)gmail.com C++/Perl developer, Debian Maintainer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature