Hi again, On Tue, 2007-03-06 at 10:34 +0100, Filippo Giunchedi wrote: > On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 01:43:57AM +0000, Regis Boudin wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I might be completely wrong, but... > > > > Playing around with dependencies trees, I noticed there are quite a few > > obsolete Conflicts fields in the archive. Would it be worth starting a > > bit of cleanup after Etch is released ? I think having the archive > > cleaner from this point of view might not be a bad thing. > > > > I mean... There are things like the 98 packages which still conflict > > with a pre-woody suidmanager, or apache with apache-modules which was > > removed from the archive 9 years ago, and I only had a quick look, so > > there are probably many more of these. I found 4410 "Conflicts" fields > > in the Packages file for main (with 19835 packages, that makes 22%), and > > it can only grow and need more useless processing to check dependencies > > if it's never cleaned up. > > great, are these results published somewhere? Trivial obsoleted conflicts might > be removed via a wishlist bug. Ok, a bit later than I expected, and not *much* information, but you can find some stuff at http://www.imalip.info/debian/conflicts_full The file is generated by simply picking the sid Packages file, making a list of all the packages with their conflicts, and checking the status against sid, etch, sarge and woody. The files have been downloaded yesterday. I tried to produce something fairly parsable, so each conflict relationship listed in sid is presented in a line with this format : <package> conflicts with <conflict> : sid,<status-sid> etch,<status-etch> sarge,<status-sarge> woody<status-woody> If the conflict is against a virtual package, it is presented as <package> conflicts with <conflict> : virtual <status-$distro> is the status of the conflict with the package in the distribution, either 'no_package', 'version_ok', or 'conflicts'. As an exemple, the line : abiword-common conflicts with abiword-doc (<< 2.0.0) : sid,no_package etch,no_package sarge,version_ok woody,conflicts Means that : -the package abiword-common has Conflicts: abiword-doc (<< 2.0.0) -abiword-doc is neither in sid, nor etch -abiword-doc is in sarge, but the version doesn't conflict (>= 2.0.0) -abiword-doc is in woody, the version conflicts. For interesting cases, you can grep -v "virtual$" and ",conflicts". This will give the list of conflicts against packages which are not in main of any of the tested distributions. A very interesting one is to ignore everything except "version_ok", as it points to conflicts with existing packages, which have been updated to a non-conflicting version before the woody release. Any comment, idea or suggestion on the subject is welcome. I should probably try to include contrib and non-free as well. Regis
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part