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

Analysis of dual-lived modules updates on 5.22

I've gone through the changes to dual-lived module Breaks in perl 5.22,
and drawn up a list of packages which need attention:


I've filed bugs for the most obvious category, where the version in core
is higher than the version the separate package. There are some other
cases which I'll file bugs for, but wanted to give people a chance to
comment on my analysis first.

In particular, where the dual-lived packages haven't been in the archive
since oldoldstable, are we happy to remove the Breaks from the perl
package? The main benefit is to make perl's debian/control slightly more
readable. The Provides/Replaces could stay if we wanted.

I will probably defer filing bugs on the 'normal' category bugs on that
list until the migration, since there's no actual impact on the migration
and upstream updates might occur naturally in the meantime.

Note: I only analysed changes to Breaks; there are probably other
packages which fit into the 'we could remove the Breaks' that I haven't

The next bit of analysis is to go through and catch versioned
Depends/Build-Depends on the uninstallable packages, and file bugs about
those. The Build-Depends will mainly be cause by rebuild testing, but
catching the others ahead of the Arch: all rebuilds makes sense anyway.

On which note: does anyone know why (for example):

    ssh mirror.ftp-master.debian.org dak rm -Rn libautodie-perl

lists, eg, librun-parts-perl for removal, when libautodie-perl is
provided by perl the the librun-parts-perl dep is unversioned?


Reply to: