The other problem is that a list of orphaned packages on the wiki would be subject to the same kind of problem: someone puts something there, then a year passes and the package isn't needed anymore but doesn't get removed because there are 8000 packages on that list. I think this wouldn't really solve much in the long term.
+1 to Mr. Haren. -Andrei "Garoth" Thorp On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Ronald van Haren <[email protected]> wrote: > On 4/6/09, Ashok Gautham <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 8:19 PM, Imanol Celaya < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> doesn't the orphan search function in AUR do the same and automated? >> >> >> That is exactly my point. Orphan search gives you even packages that have >> been >> orphaned because the packages are not needed any more. In fact such packages >> are the majority. >> >> --- >> Ashok `ScriptDevil` Gautham >> > > Instead of inventing a new way of sorting orphan packages it would be > best to put the/'a lot of' effort in cleaning up the current list. > Packages that should not be there should be removed. > > Ronald >
