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

Re: Uninstallable packages



On Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 02:12:32PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 01:34:30PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Current stats, for potato:
> >      * powerpc     64
> >      * arm         86
> > For comparison, `testing', which is basically potato + as many packages
> > from woody that are up-to-date, and don't have egregious dependency
> > issues, looks roughly [0] like:
> >      * powerpc     54
> >      * arm         81
> Hm. So this means that there more uninstallable packages for arm and powerpc
> in potato than in the potato+etc distribution? I don't get it :)

What can I say? `testing' just rox0rs. :)

`testing' operates /almost/ exclusively on a "will this decrease the
number of uninstallable packages?" basis. The only exception is for
binary only uploads where the old binary was essentially out-of-date.

(So really it's the extra uninstallable packages on the other arches
that are more indicative of a problem, in particular that the binaries
for potato might be out of date compared to the source)

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG encrypted mail preferred.

 ``<dark> Weeks are the same thing as months.  That is the
         secret behind the Debian release schedule.''
                          -- Richard Braakman, Debian Release Manager

Attachment: pgpz4nImloIC0.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: