Il giorno Mon, 08 Feb 2010 17:01:32 -0800 Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> ha scritto: > > A package is declared empty if all of this conditions are met: > > * package does not ship files outside of /usr/share/doc/$pkg > > * package does not have subdirectories in its /usr/share/doc dir > > * package does not have files in its /usr/share/doc dir but common > > ones (copyright, changelog*, README, AUTHORS, NEWS, ...) > > * package does not have a "whitelist" word in its description: > > - meta > > - transition > > - dummy > > - dependency package > > - empty package > > - virtual package > > This looks like a good approach to me. There's a similar test in > Lintian already to determine which packages are metapackages, but > it's currently used in a much more limited way. I think Lintian > excludes anything that's named like a documentation package, but I > like your approach better. I've prepared a patch and submitted as #569220 [1]. > > I'm aware this could lead to false positives. In my test, > > preliminary list of packages included some packages which didn't > > declare themselves as "meta packages", but I think they should warn > > users about their "meta" status, so they can be eventually removed. > > Probably would be good to accompany this with a patch to devref > recommending a way to denote such packages. Also done as per #569219 [2]. [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=569220 [2] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=569219 -- .''`. : :' : Luca Falavigna <dktrkranz@debian.org> `. `' `-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature