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

Re: Automatic Debug Packages

Hello thread! /me puts on a package manager developer hat.

Sorry, I haven't read the whole thread, it's huge.

I think that diversion of debug packages out of current deb format is a
completely wrong direction. Do you want to teach all tools that get some info
about Debian packages that there is new 'ddeb' format packages? New .ddeb
extension? For a what sake?

Oh, no, and this covers not 3 packages. Let's count. The following command
counts reverse {predepends,depends,recommends} to apt (which contains
libapt-pkg) and to libcupt:

$ cupt rdepends apt libcupt-perl 2>/dev/null | grep Reverse | wc -l

To extract the info 'is this debug package?' you can use a good and easy
regular expression '.*-debug$' applied to package name (or any other suffix
you want).

Are there other reasons?

[Roger Leigh]
> I see no reason why they
> can't be first-class Debian packages
Fully agree.

While I support automatic generation of debug packages, creating a new format
for them sounds for me as creating new RFC for e-mails which bodies contain no
spaces and no Bcc header allowed. Why? To filter 'automatic debug mails'.

Eugene V. Lyubimkin aka JackYF, JID: jackyf.devel(maildog)gmail.com
C++/Perl developer, Debian Maintainer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: