Re: Description-less packages file
Hi again *,
given that my previous mail was dropped by every list expect
debian-l10n-devel (which dropped it into moderation queue) 
let me be offensive and just forward it to debian-devel again
(as i haven't the time to bother [various] listmasters now)
where at least Eugenes mail ended up, even through his was
dropped by other lists, too…
All i can say about that: "Et tu, firstname.lastname@example.org?"
debian-l10n-devel is properly right: Too many to-addresses…
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Kalnischkies <email@example.com>
Date: Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 21:22
Subject: Re: Description-less packages file
To: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,
First of all: Yeah! ;)
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 16:39, Joerg Jaspert <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> I just merged a patch from Ansgar to generate the Packages files without
> the English description embedded inside them. Instead they are now
> written into a new file, the "English Translation" file in
> "main/i18n/Translation-en.bz2". They thus appear alongside all other
> translated descriptions as "just another language". apt & co will (or
> should) just download those Translation files to show the description,
> as they do already for all other languages.
Back in the good old days in 2009  in which we discussed that feature
my impression was that we want to remove the long description from the
Packages files, not the complete description - mostly for compatibility
reasons indeed, but having some sort of description available even without
translations doesn't feel that wrong - at least for me.
Anyway, the apt in squeeze supports the removal of long descriptions
in the way it was described back then and is since recently used by
ubuntu as I was told. The complete removal is NOT supported in a way
that it will even do random stuff (aka segfaults) see #647590.
The bugreport claims that aptitude works, which I personally doubt a bit
as it should use the very same codepaths, but even if it would I assume
that other libapt users are failing. I guess other applications/script
make assumptions about the availability of a Description, too.
So, long story short: Is this going to be the implementation ftp-master
chooses for wheezy or are we getting a short description back?
And while we are on it: Could we get i18n/Index (back) and have it look
like a "normal" Release file instead of this ".bz2-only"-listing?
(because apt/wheezy really uses it to avoid requesting not-existent files)