Re: Bug#726492: debian-edu: Task files are specifying a lot of not existing / renamed packages
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 04:55:20PM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Mittwoch, 16. Oktober 2013, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > Yes, there is a way. Inspecting the log I've posted. Could you please
> > have a real look at the list?
>
> Could you provide examples from that list, please? You already parsed it it
> seems.
task common: Package gcc-4.0-base not found
task common: Package expect-tcl8.3 is provided in Ubuntu
task common: Package tk8.3 is provided in Ubuntu
task common: Package gobjc-4.2 is provided in Ubuntu
task common: Package gobjc++-4.2 is provided in Ubuntu
task common: Package gfortran-4.2 is provided in Ubuntu
task common: Package sun-java5-bin is provided in Ubuntu
task common: Package sun-java5-jre is provided in Ubuntu
task common: Package sun-java5-plugin is provided in Ubuntu
task main-server: Package php4-cli not found
task main-server: Package php4 not found
task desktop-other: Package gij-4.1 is provided in Ubuntu
task desktop-other: Package ibm-jdk1.1-installer not found
task desktop-other: Package jdk1.1 not found
task desktop-other: Package kaffe is provided in Ubuntu
...
Here are some tricky ones you most probably want to replace with valid
packages:
task lang-no-desktop: Package openoffice.org-help-nb not found
task lang-no-desktop: Package openoffice.org-help-nn not found
task lang-no-desktop: Package icedove-l10n-nb not found
task lang-no-desktop: Package icedove-l10n-nn not found
task desktop-other: Package openoffice.org-help-en not found
task desktop-other: Package openoffice.org-l10n-common is provided in Ubuntu
task desktop-other: Package openoffice.org-l10n-en-us not found
task desktop-other: Package openoffice.org-l10n-fr is mentioned more than once. There is no point in adding an extra entry with strength 'ignore'.
task desktop-other: The warning about duplicated package openoffice.org-l10n-fr should have just happended'.
task desktop-other: Package openoffice.org-l10n-hi not found
task desktop-other: Package openoffice.org-l10n-lo is provided in Ubuntu
task desktop-other: Package openoffice.org-l10n-sr-cs not found
task desktop-other: Package iceweasel-l10n-cy-gb not found
task desktop-other: Package iceweasel-l10n-et-ee not found
task desktop-other: Package iceweasel-l10n-roa-es-val not found
task desktop-other: Package iceweasel-l10n-uk-ua not found
task desktop-other: Package kde-l10n-af not found
task desktop-other: Package kde-l10n-az not found
task desktop-other: Package kde-l10n-bn not found
task desktop-other: Package kde-l10n-br not found
task desktop-other: Package kde-l10n-cy not found
task desktop-other: Package kde-l10n-mn not found
task desktop-other: Package kde-l10n-ms not found
task desktop-other: Package kde-l10n-rw not found
task desktop-other: Package kde-l10n-se is provided in Ubuntu
task desktop-other: Package kde-l10n-srlatin not found
task desktop-other: Package kde-l10n-ss not found
task desktop-other: Package kde-l10n-ta not found
task desktop-other: Package kde-l10n-uz not found
...
> > Moreover: Future packages should get some additional information inside
> > the tasks file - you might really want to reread the docs[2].
>
> Frankly: if debian-blends only gives me work more work regularily,
Ups, please prove your point: In how far does the Blends framework
gives you more work? I would say it just opens your eyes for work
you missed to do.
> why should
> I use it at all? As I see it we want to maintain a few metapackages with it,
> keeping up with some meta framework just to achieve this, seems a bit
> cumbersome...
Please be more verbose how you want to maintain "a few metapackages"
just without checking whether
* they are valid
* they contain things that should not be in
The framework was initially invented by Petter for Debian Edu
exclusively and I took the freedom to enhance it for everybody. Your
question why you should use what you invented before becomes a bit
unexpected, really. And you should know that I spended a lot of time on
creating tools that go way beyond just metapackages you could perfectly
use for advertising of Debian Edu and doing QA work. Its not my fault
if you reduce the framework only onto "a few metapackages".
> (eg also that the debian-edu package requires a special buld
> procedure is not nice for new Debian Edu developers.)
I admit this is an issue and I'm working with my GSoC student to try to
fix this. However, the exact wording for your sentence above would be
"... the debian-edu *source* package requires ..." I really wonder in
how far a "make dist" is so complex to create a source package.
In the GSoC project we even injected automatic debian/changelog creation
what package was added / removed and added support for different
architectures (I'm keen on learning how you want to cope with this with
your "a few metapackages" editing approach). Unfortunately the source
package creation process is *now* a bit more advanced than a simple
"make dist" and thus we did not yet released it.
Please try to understand: The Blends framework is *not* adding work to
your todolist but is hinting you what work you have missed to do in the
past. I could even imagine to help you in doing this work but when I
tried in previous cases (again feel free to seek the list) my changes
were reverted with arguments like: "We are in freeze" or so.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: