Re: Recent changes in dpkg
]] Steve Langasek
| On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 02:54:17PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
| > ]] Neil Williams
|
| > | You seem to think that every package is going to be uploaded just for
| > | the sake of an upload.
|
| > | There is no way to guarantee that ALL packages in Debian will be
| > | uploaded again by some point in the future.
|
| > | If a package does not need an upload - e.g. the only "issue" is an
| > | ancient standards version - then dpkg cannot change behaviour in a way
| > | that makes that package FTBFS.
|
| > You make it sound like a package upload is a big deal. Sometimes, you
| > upload for small things, there's nothing wrong with that.
|
| No, he's saying that 16,000 package uploads are a big deal, which is the
| number of source packages that have to be uploaded in order to complete this
| transition.
(There are about 12.3k 1.0 packages, not 16k, but that's a fairly minor
detail. :-)
How many of those would have been uploaded anyway over two cycles? I
don't have firm numbers, but my suspicion is «most of them». This would
then just be one of those minor things you do when you update to a newer
standards-version and fix various lintian nits.
In fact, according to http://upsilon.cc/~zack/stuff/dpkg-v3/, we're
looking at about 480 packages being converted to 3.0 per month, meaning
that at the current rate we'll probably be at something like 120% of the
archive converted for squeeze+1. ;-)
[...]
| > How is this different to other changes in the toolchain which sometimes
| > deprecate and remove functionality which then makes packages FTBFS?
|
| Can you point to such a toolchain change that required changes to even 20%
| of the packages in th archive?
I wasn't around for the libc5 => libc6 transition, but my understanding
is it was larger than 20% of the archive. I would guesstimate the
removal of /usr/X11R6 at being around the 20% mark (including binNMUs
and all). So while they're uncommon, they're not unheard of.
--
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are
Reply to: