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

Bug#890724: marked as done (gcc-7: redundant base packages)

Your message dated Sun, 18 Feb 2018 15:40:57 +0700
with message-id <401782a1-f6bf-6db7-38a6-fcae0a4899c7@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#890724: gcc-7: redundant base packages
has caused the Debian Bug report #890724,
regarding gcc-7: redundant base packages
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
890724: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=890724
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: gcc-7
Version: 7.3.0-3
Severity: normal

The files in these packages seem to be essentially duplicates of each
other. Is this really necessary?


    # deborphan gcc-6-base gcc-7-base gcc-8-base
    gcc-6-base
          libgcj17
          gcj-6-jre-headless
          gcj-6-jre-lib
          libgcj17-awt
          gcj-6-jre
    gcc-7-base
          libasan4
          libgfortran4
          gcc-7
          g++-7
          libcilkrts5
          libubsan0
          libgcc-7-dev
          cpp-7
          libstdc++-7-dev
          libobjc-7-dev
    gcc-8-base
          libquadmath0
          libgomp1
          libatomic1
          libcc1-0
          libobjc4
          libtsan0
          liblsan0
          libmpx2
          libstdc++6
          lib32stdc++6
          libitm1
          libgcc1
          lib32gcc1


-- System Information:
Debian Release: buster/sid
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'stable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 4.14.0-3-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_CA.utf8, LC_CTYPE=en_CA.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=en_CA.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled

Versions of packages gcc-7 depends on:
ii  binutils      2.30-4
ii  cpp-7         7.3.0-3
ii  gcc-7-base    7.3.0-3
ii  libc6         2.26-4
ii  libcc1-0      8-20180207-2
ii  libgcc-7-dev  7.3.0-3
ii  libgcc1       1:8-20180207-2
ii  libgmp10      2:6.1.2+dfsg-2
ii  libisl15      0.18-1
ii  libmpc3       1.1.0-1
ii  libmpfr6      4.0.0-7
ii  libstdc++6    8-20180207-2
ii  zlib1g        1:1.2.8.dfsg-5

Versions of packages gcc-7 recommends:
ii  libc6-dev  2.26-4

Versions of packages gcc-7 suggests:
ii  gcc-7-doc         7.2.0-1
pn  gcc-7-locales     <none>
pn  gcc-7-multilib    <none>
pn  libasan4-dbg      <none>
pn  libatomic1-dbg    <none>
pn  libcilkrts5-dbg   <none>
pn  libgcc1-dbg       <none>
pn  libgomp1-dbg      <none>
pn  libitm1-dbg       <none>
pn  liblsan0-dbg      <none>
pn  libmpx2-dbg       <none>
pn  libquadmath0-dbg  <none>
pn  libtsan0-dbg      <none>
pn  libubsan0-dbg     <none>

-- no debconf information

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On 18.02.2018 08:10, Ian Bruce wrote:
> Package: gcc-7
> Version: 7.3.0-3
> Severity: normal
> 
> The files in these packages seem to be essentially duplicates of each
> other. Is this really necessary?

No, they might be different, and are required by Debian policy, because we
cannot ship symlinks to doc dirs for packages built from a different source package.

--- End Message ---
Reply to: