On Sun, 10 Mar 2024 15:27:21 + Scott Kitterman
wrote:
On March 10, 2024 3:23:32 PM UTC, "Martin-Éric Racine"
wrote:
>On Sat, 2 Mar 2024 18:40:13 +0100 Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
>> * Christoph Biedl [240302 17:02]:
>> > Chris Hofstaedtler wrote...
>> >
>> > > please remove deborphan.
One addition, it seems Synaptic is internally also using deborphan:
https://github.com/mvo5/synaptic/blob/0.91.3/common/raptoptions.cc#L202-L230
and the removal of deborphan seems to break this integration as well.
Hello everyone,
just adding the following from a user-perspective:
I was quite surprised that a tool i'm using since two decades and on a
nearly weekly base is getting suddenly removed from Debian.
And when looking at the title of the relevant bug report of the removal
to notice a "broken and
On 2024-04-17 01:39:48 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2024-03-11 15:18:44 +0100, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> > Thus, a good approximation of the default deborphan functionality
> > (no additional options passed) is:
> >
> > $ apt-mark auto '~i !~M
> >
On 2024-03-11 15:18:44 +0100, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> Thus, a good approximation of the default deborphan functionality
> (no additional options passed) is:
>
> $ apt-mark auto '~i !~M (~slibs|~soldlibs|~slibdevel|~sintrospection|~sdebug)'
> possibly followed by
No, to mimic deborphan, you
On Tue, 12 Mar 2024 10:22:25 +0200
=?UTF-8?Q?Martin=2D=C3=89ric_Racine?=
wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Mar 2024 15:18:44 +0100 Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 02, 2024 at 03:16:22PM +0100, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> > > Given the C codebase and lack of any patches so far I do not see that
> > >
On Mon, 11 Mar 2024 15:18:44 +0100 Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 02, 2024 at 03:16:22PM +0100, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> > Given the C codebase and lack of any patches so far I do not see that
> > deborphan will ever get these features, and we have other tools
> > available that work,
On Sun, 10 Mar 2024 15:27:21 + Scott Kitterman wrote:
>
>
> On March 10, 2024 3:23:32 PM UTC, "Martin-Éric Racine"
> wrote:
> >On Sat, 2 Mar 2024 18:40:13 +0100 Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> >> * Christoph Biedl [240302 17:02]:
> >> > Chris Hofstaedtler wrote...
> >> >
> >> > > please
On Sat, Mar 02, 2024 at 03:16:22PM +0100, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> Given the C codebase and lack of any patches so far I do not see that
> deborphan will ever get these features, and we have other tools
> available that work, do not mess with dpkg internals and are actually
> maintained.
As
On March 10, 2024 3:23:32 PM UTC, "Martin-Éric Racine"
wrote:
>On Sat, 2 Mar 2024 18:40:13 +0100 Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
>> * Christoph Biedl [240302 17:02]:
>> > Chris Hofstaedtler wrote...
>> >
>> > > please remove deborphan. It is stuck, featurewise, in a very old time
>> > > and does
On Sat, 2 Mar 2024 18:40:13 +0100 Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> * Christoph Biedl [240302 17:02]:
> > Chris Hofstaedtler wrote...
> >
> > > please remove deborphan. It is stuck, featurewise, in a very old time
> > > and does not support many currently available dpkg features properly
> > >
Generally in the FTP Team we trust maintainer's judgement when it comes to
deciding if a package should be removed rather than orphaned and left to rot.
I looked and it's been about 5 years since anyone other than Chris has uploaded
the package and he's the only human maintainer.
It is both a
Chris Hofstaedtler wrote...
> You are welcome to write a new tool or implement all the missing
> parts in deborphan and deal with users thinking deborphan is a magic
> tool that knows everything and its output can be used by
> non-thinking humans. Various people in the past have suggested its
>
* Christoph Biedl [240302 17:02]:
> Chris Hofstaedtler wrote...
>
> > please remove deborphan. It is stuck, featurewise, in a very old time
> > and does not support many currently available dpkg features properly
> > (multi-arch, versioned provides, etc).
>
> FWIW, deborphan is part of my
Chris Hofstaedtler wrote...
> please remove deborphan. It is stuck, featurewise, in a very old time
> and does not support many currently available dpkg features properly
> (multi-arch, versioned provides, etc).
FWIW, deborphan is part of my regular workflow, and while you claim
it has defects,
Package: ftp.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: ftp.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: remove
X-Debbugs-Cc: deborp...@packages.debian.org
Control: affects -1 + src:deborphan
Dear ftpmasters,
please remove deborphan. It is stuck, featurewise, in a very old time
and does not support many
16 matches
Mail list logo
