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

Bug#635441: lintian: Add libdigest-sha1-perl to the list of obsoleted packages



Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.1
Severity: normal
Tags: patch

Hi Lintian Maintainers

We from the Debian Perl Group would like to go forward the goal to
drop libdigest-sha1-perl. As you can read from [1], most of the
functionality which is provided by Digest::SHA1 is also provided by
Digest::SHA. Thus switching from rom Digest::SHA1 to Digest::SHA
should be in principle as easy as substituting the use of Digest::SHA1
with Digest::SHA. 

Furthermore: Digest::SHA is in Perl core since version 5.9.3 and thus
is in Debian's perl since Lenny and thus changing this will too reduce
the external dependencies by one. For more details please see [2].

 [1] http://bugs.debian.org/594273
 [2] http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DebianPerlGroup/OpenTasks/Transitions/DigestSHA1ToDigestSHA

The attached patch adds libdigest-sha1-perl to the list of the
obsoleted packages, would it be possible to add it?

Regards
Salvatore

-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
>From 29be5a84c4977f6d4b2e64fc6fcf9eff8672f8ae Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 21:54:54 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] add libdigest-sha1-perl to the obsoleted packages

---
 data/fields/obsolete-packages |    2 ++
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/data/fields/obsolete-packages b/data/fields/obsolete-packages
index e4f2a17..0180df4 100644
--- a/data/fields/obsolete-packages
+++ b/data/fields/obsolete-packages
@@ -60,3 +60,5 @@ xutils
 # Last seen in Squeeze
 default-jdk-builddep
 
+# See: http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DebianPerlGroup/OpenTasks/Transitions/DigestSHA1ToDigestSHA
+libdigest-sha1-perl
-- 
1.7.5.4


Reply to: