[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Obsolete packages in hamm/main

Just when I decide to take a week off from Debian, interesting things
happen :-)

I have used some scripts to compare the hamm/main source archive to
the binary-i386 archive.  I have come up with some mismatches between
the source and binary packages.  Perhaps this information will be
useful for release planning.  I suspect that most of the packages
named here are obsolete.

Source packages that are superseded by other source packages:
  Source package     generates           which is already generated by
   compface           compface            libcompface
   dotfile-bash       dotfile-bash        dotfile
   dotfile-elm        dotfile-elm         dotfile
   dotfile-emacs      dotfile-emacs       dotfile
   dotfile-fvwm1      dotfile-fvwm1       dotfile
   dotfile-fvwm2      dotfile-fvwm2       dotfile
   dotfile-rtin       dotfile-rtin        dotfile
   dotfile-tcsh       dotfile-tcsh        dotfile
   jedsl              jedsl               jed
   olvwm              olvwm               xview
   xemacs             xemacs20            xemacs20
   xemacs             xemacs20-support    xemacs20
   xemacs             xemacs20-supportel  xemacs20
If a package is listed here, it means that the binary package in the
second column lists the source package in the third column as its 
source.  The source package in the first column is probably obsolete.

Source packages without binaries:
  Source package gclinfo generates binary packages gclinfo and
  gclinfo-html, but gclinfo-html does not exist in hamm.

  Source package xdigger generates binary package xdigger, which
  does not exist in hamm.

Binary packages with missing source:
  Packages aout-xpm, seesat5, xcompat, and xega are not generated by
  any source package in hamm/main/source.

Binary packages with bad source:
  Packages joe, lambdamoo, and magicfilter have a .orig.tar.gz file, 
  but no .dsc or .diff.gz files.

Binary packages that are not generated by their source packages:
  Binary package          lists as source   probably superseded by
   aout-binutils           binutils          
   aout-gcc                gcc
   awe-patch               awe
   awe-utils               awe
   blt                     blt               blt2 and blt2-dev
   libhdf4-dev             libhdf4           libhdf4-altdev
   libjpeg-dev             libjpeg           libjpeg-altdev
   libpng0-dev             libpng0           libpng0-altdev
   libtiff3-dev            libtiff3          libtiff3-altdev
   netcdf-dev              netcdf            netcdf-altdev
   pcmcia-modules-2.0.29   pcmcia-cs
   pcmcia-modules-2.0.29-8 pcmcia-cs
   pcmcia-modules-2.0.30   pcmcia-cs
   pcmcia-modules-2.0.30-8 pcmcia-cs
   xpm4.7-dev              xpm               xpm4-altdev
   xview-dev               xview             xview-altdev
For each of the binary packages here, no source package exists in
hamm/main/source that generates them.

Binary package whose source is in old source format:
  cdwrite, cern-httpd, dld, elisp-manual, emacs-lisp-intro, f2c,
  hfsutils, infocom, j1, manpages-de, ncpfs, net-acct, netcat, p2c,
  ratfor77, rspfd, sam, smail, term, unarj
  libc4 and libc4-dev (generated by libc4)
  tcl74 and tcl74-dev (generated by tcl74)
  tcl75 and tcl75-dev (generated by tcl75)
  tk40 and tk40-dev (generated by tk40)
  tk41 and tk41-dev (generated by tk41)
This list rolled out of the scripts as a kind of bonus :-)

I hope this helps,

Richard Braakman

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . Trouble? 
e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: