Hi, Am Samstag, den 20.06.2015, 12:42 +0000 schrieb Gianfranco Costamagna: > This implies that we should remove all packages that are neither in > > Stackage nor that are (used by) key packages. > > > I added support for such reasoning to the package plan, and marked a > > few packages as key packages. This would currently imply that we can > > remove these packages: > > > I do not get here the question, do you mean the haskell library, right? > sounds impossible to remove dpkg :) Right, these names were all from the Hackage package namespace. > * bytestring-show > > > > This one is a b-d of hedgewars > https://sources.debian.net/src/hedgewars/0.9.21.1 > -5/debian/control/"libghc-bytestring-show-dev," > > > so how can it be removed? I thought that list was made of leaf > haskell packages... They are, but only packages from hackage were taken into account. So the solution is simply to make bytestring-show a key package in this (corner) case. Alternatively, we could create a fake .cabal file with hedgewar’s dependencies and add them to the package-plan, like we do with the output of "yesod init". Probably the cleaner solution. Would you mind creating such a cabal file (check if the hedgewars sources already contain one)? > and yes, I agree with the overall process, keeping unused leaf > libraries seems an overkill for haskell. > Nice, Joachim -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner Debian Developer nomeata@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: F0FBF51F JID: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part