Re: A new metric for source package importance in ports
On 28 November 2013 00:04, Steven Chamberlain <steven@pyro.eu.org> wrote:
> Hi josch!
>
> On 27/11/13 17:58, Johannes Schauer wrote:
>> http://mister-muffin.de/p/Gid8.txt
>>
>> One can see that now the amount of source packages which is needed to build the
>> rest of the archive is only 383.
>
> So, there are 383 packages that share the same, maximum value (in this
> case 11657) in the second column?
>
>> Does anybody see enough value in these numbers for source package importance in
>> the light of bootstrapping Debian (either for a new port or for rebuilding the
>> archive from scratch)?
>
> I find the list of 383 packages interesting, at least. I think this
> closure is what I had in mind[0] for regular testing of ports'
> toolchains and reproducibility of builds. Because each Debian port
> depends in some indirect way on the authenticity of these packages. And
> likewise any toolchain bugs are most critical here. I just didn't think
> there would be so many packages.
>
> Does the list vary by architecture? I see many odd things in here such
> as 'systemd' and 'redhat-cluster' which would be unavailable if trying
> to bootstrap a non-Linux port, for example.
>
> I also find it interesting to see openjdk-7 listed but not gcj; or even
> gcc-4.8. Was this computed for jessie or sid?
I guess implicit relationships are not considered: build-essential
build-dependencies, and essential dependencies. I would expect for
packages in those to sets have the highest rank, since,
hypothetically, all packages in debian build-depend & depend on those.
Regards,
Dmitrijs.
Reply to: