Re: Section gnustep, was: http://packages.debian.org/unstable/
On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 08:57:46AM +0100, G?rkan Seng?n wrote:
> >> I believe we need a new section called "gnustep", just like we have one
> >> for gnome and kde.
> > I think this is a good idea. Would it start by being populated with
> > anything depending on gnustep*, or did I not think that through? What
> > packages would that give?
> Yep, this would also help me have less warnings in the gnustep-meta
> packages ( http://www.linuks.mine.nu/i_debian/meta-gnustep/ ), can we
> change lintian like this:
>
> If all agree that we add 'gnustep' to the section. I think
> lintian package should be updated by adding 'gnustep' to:
> lintian source
> testset/info_tags.non-us, line 28
> checks/common_data.pm, line 21
> checks/fields.desc, line 172
This will happen automatically (well, sort of) by the lintian
maintainers when policy gets changed (and not earlier than that).
On topic: I don't really think a section for this few packages is worth
it.
Package count (binary, unstable of two days ago, without contrib and
non-free) is below, and it shows that even the smallest section has
nearly 300 packages.
Maybe there are better splits to imagine (seperate compilers from
devel? Client networking stuff from net (as opposed to server networking
stuff)?)
--Jeroen
shells 292
news 327
embedded 383
electronics 515
oldlibs 647
comm 658
tex 700
hamradio 734
otherosfs 845
base 890
science 921
doc 1037
kde 1155
editors 1314
math 1429
misc 2049
mail 2233
perl 2482
gnome 2606
graphics 2765
text 2914
interpreters 3081
web 3233
python 3252
sound 3280
admin 3765
games 4724
x11 5217
utils 5333
devel 7002
net 8941
libdevel 11895
libs 13390
--Jeroen
--
Jeroen van Wolffelaar
Jeroen@wolffelaar.nl (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357)
http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl
Reply to: