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

Re: Remove a package?



On Wed, 6 May 2009 03:34:12 +0700
Alexey Salmin <alexey.salmin@gmail.com> wrote:

CC'ing the maintainer.

> Hello! At first I want to say that I'm not sure that this mailing list
> is a right place for my letter. Secondly, this letter isn't actually
> about some specific package, I'm just interested in understanding
> Debain policies.

http://www.uk.debian.org/Bugs/Reporting

The pseudo-package you need is:
ftp.debian.org — Problems with the FTP site 

(Although the pseudo-package description doesn't explicitly point at
bugs that cause the removal of a package, checking the actual bug
report page lists lots of RM bugs.)

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=ftp.debian.org;dist=unstable

There is a particular syntax for such bug reports.

> Is there any way to remove some package from debian distribution? For
> example: package bcrypt is completely dead. It doesn't work at amd64
> at all because of obvious bug, which I've reported here (path
> included) half a year ago, but got no response. Last update of
> official site (http://bcrypt.sourceforge.net/) was in September 2002.
> This program doesn't work and has no support. Is there any reason to
> keep such packages?

Why remove it when it could be possible to prepare a fixed package,
make it available via mentors.debian.net and get a sponsor to upload it
as an Non-Maintainer Upload?

If the package was fixed on amd64, would you still use it? The package
seems quite popular:

http://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=bcrypt

Just because a package is old or dead upstream doesn't mean it is
necessarily removable from Debian - there has to be a problem with the
package on a release architecture (as there is on amd64 currently) or
building from source or using an old lib like gtk1.2 etc.

-- 


Neil Williams
=============
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/

Attachment: pgpx5IN9UDlZ7.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: