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

Re: removal / ignore suggestions

On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 01:07:02AM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> I updated my aggressive removal suggestions. Please tell me if there
> are any issues with it, so that I can update them. As I said, these
> suggestions are quite aggressive IMHO, and I also picked some packages
> up with the intention: It's just long enough, remove it.

> New are also ignore-suggestions. At the end are the left over removal
> suggestions from my last mail.

Digging into these now.  BTW, it would be helpful if you would include
bug numbers with your requests, as this is ultimately what I base my
decision on (since at a minimum I have to check that the bugs still
apply), and what I've been using as the comment on the hints.

> # suggestions from 2004-06-02

> # icukrell: Too buggy for Testing (bug report from maintainer)
> remove icukrell/2.0.0pre0.1-2
> # don't ship 0.3.1-5.1 with sarge (bug report from maintainer)
> remove vegastrike/0.3.1-5.1

Hints added.

> # undistributable code in non-free, maintainer doesn't take action
> remove 3270/3.2.17-2
> remove abc2mtex/1.6.1-5

At only 22 days, these are currently below my threshold.

> # FTBFS, first reported on 2002-11-20, no success in fixing till now
> remove xemacs21-packages/2003.01.27-1.1

Hint added, but this also seems to require removal of xemacs21 itself.

> # can't fulfill the Recommends since two months, no maintainer reaction
> remove python-osd/0.2.6-1

> # FTBFS since 2004-04-29; plptools: FTBFS: kdb2html is no more
> remove plptools/0.12-4


> # sarge-ignore suggestions

> # ignore 232715 - master.cf modified by maintainer scripts and a conffile
> # reason: updates from woody to sarge work.

I would prefer that if the package is going to specially handle the
config file, the maintainer use a tool such as ucf instead of touching a
conffile.  As such, I'm not going to tag this myself, even though the
impact appears to be minimal.

> # ignore 246047
> # ignore 246048
> # ignore 246049
> # reason: bug is that the Star data catalogue may not be distributed in
> # modified form

Shelved pending resolution of the current release policy crisis.

> # left-overs from last mail

> # fixing was promised at start of April
> remove gnats/4.0-3

According to the maintainer, only the version in unstable has this bug;
tagged accordingly.

> # gnatsweb depend on gnats
> # remove gnatsweb/4.00-1

Actually, it only suggests gnats, AFAICT.  Bizarre, that.

> # bug report at start of April, no reaction to it
> remove htdig/3.2.0b5-5


> # FTBFS / build-depends-conflict, maintainer doesn't want NMUs
> remove libapache-mod-auth-useragent/1.0-7
> remove libapache-mod-cgi-debug/0.7-9
> remove libapache-mod-filter/1.4-8
> remove libapache-mod-index-rss/0.10-9
> remove libapache-mod-ldap/1.4-7
> remove libapache-mod-mp3/0.39-3
> remove libapache-mod-random/1.4-8
> remove libapache-mod-relocate/1.0-9
> remove libapache-mod-repository/0.3-8
> remove libapache-mod-text2html/1.0-7
> remove libapache-mod-trigger/1.1-4

All hinted.

> # wrong shell code, patch sitting since Mar 14 there, in non-free
> remove maelstrom/1.4.3-L3.0.5-3

Given that I find 210 usages of test test1 -a test2 in 175 postinsts on
my local system, and only four of those postinst scripts declare
/bin/bash as an interpreter, I would like to see a POSIX citation for
this bug before we endure the joy of that particular mass-bugfiling.

Comment sent to the bug submitter.  I'm inclined to tag this as
sarge-ignore regardless of the outcome, given the number of affected
packages and the minimal concrete impact.

> # unbuildable since some time; also not part of woody
> remove pixieplus/0.5.4-2

> # license requires non-commercial use; bug since 20 Mar w/o
> # maintainers reaction
> remove smssend/3.2-0.2

Both hinted.  Note that in the latter bug, the maintainer did react, but
his reaction is hidden in a control message.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: