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