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

Re: Migration of non-free packages to testing

On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 11:06:28PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mer 13/11/2002 ? 20:41, Junichi Uekawa a ?crit :
> > However, non-free should not mean low-quality, and it might be better
> > just to remove buggy packages from the non-free distribution.
> Let me second that.
> There are many buggy or unmaintained packages in the non-free section,
> and they don't deserve anything else than being removed.

$ lynx -source 'http://bugs.debian.org/release-critical/other/all.html' | 
  sed 's/<[^>]*>//g' | grep ^Package: | cut -d\  -f3 | sort | uniq -c

451 (88.4%) RC bugs in main,
 25  (4.9%) RC bugs in non-US/main
 16  (3.1%) RC bugs in non-free
 13  (2.5%) RC bugs in contrib
  1  (0.2%) RC bug in non-US/contrib
  4  (0.8%) RC bugs in pseudo packages

While those numbers aren't particularly firm and shouldn't be relied
on too heavily, they do seem to indicate that non-free isn't a whole
lot buggier than main -- based on the proportion of non-free packages
we have, you'd expect around 14 RC bugs, to main's 450.

Less severe bugs might give you a different indication, of course; but
this at least suggests that we're not doing any worse a job maintaining
non-free, compared to main.


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

 ``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.''

Reply to: