Bug#972437: debian-reference: mentions no longer existing packages
Dear Osamu, Thanks for your feedback. 在 2021/1/10 下午9:10, Osamu Aoki 写道: On Mon, 2020-12-14 at 10:06 +0800, xiao sheng wen wrote: In most situation, if one package in oldstable but not in stable,this package can usually been installed in stable. Drop such packages from listing is also fix this bug report. Is debian-reference need to support list such oldstable packages? I'm not sure. ... I think it is better to drop such dying packages ... but due to limitted time, I decided to go along this solution which allow me to upload without much change in package list. Ok. I did revert some of the package dependency added since they are not needed as a part of automatic package build process. No problem. I'd see added the "Reminder" section in README.md. Anyway, a new package was uploaded with major source change to XML. The git log is very detail for this change. I will think about this in after next Debian release. Ok. Osamu -- 肖盛文 xiao sheng wen Faris Xiao 微信(wechat)：atzlinux 《铜豌豆 Linux》https://www.atzlinux.com 基于 Debian 的 Linux 中文 桌面 操作系统 Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=atzlinux%40sina.com GnuPG Public Key: 0x00186602339240CB OpenPGP_0x00186602339240CB.asc Description: application/pgp-keys OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#972437: debian-reference: mentions no longer existing packages
On Mon, 2020-12-14 at 10:06 +0800, xiao sheng wen wrote: > In most situation, if one package in oldstable but not in stable,this > package can usually been installed in stable. > > Drop such packages from listing is also fix this bug report. > > Is debian-reference need to support list such oldstable packages? I'm > not sure. ... I think it is better to drop such dying packages ... but due to limitted time, I decided to go along this solution which allow me to upload without much change in package list. I did revert some of the package dependency added since they are not needed as a part of automatic package build process. Anyway, a new package was uploaded with major source change to XML. I will think about this in after next Debian release. Osamu
Bug#972437: debian-reference: mentions no longer existing packages
In most situation, if one package in oldstable but not in stable,this package can usually been installed in stable. Drop such packages from listing is also fix this bug report. Is debian-reference need to support list such oldstable packages? I'm not sure. 在 2020/12/14 上午6:25, Osamu Aoki 写道: > Doesn't this give impression that these packages are supported well? > I usually drop such packages from listing > > On Fri, 2020-11-13 at 16:44 +0800, xiao sheng wen (肖盛文) wrote: >> tags -1 + fixed pending >> >> >> I'd committed the patch in git repo use the attachment patch. >> >> This patch add the package info come from oldstable and stable. >> >> Debian-reference will get the package info from oldstable, stable, >> sid now. >> >> 在 2020/10/21 下午5:36, Holger Wansing 写道: >>> We talk about experienced users here, but if such users are unable >>> to find old versions of the debian-reference in the archive, they >>> should >>> better not mix up stable and oldstable (and therefore risk to break >>> the next dist-upgrade and similar), since they are *not* >>> experienced users, >>> but - ok, I will stop that here. >>> >>> Holger >>> -- 肖盛文 xiao sheng wen Faris Xiao 微信(wechat)：atzlinux 《铜豌豆 Linux》 基于 Debian 的 Linux 中文桌面操作系统：https://www.atzlinux.com Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=atzlinux%40sina.com GnuPG Public Key: 0x339240CB OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#972437: debian-reference: mentions no longer existing packages
Doesn't this give impression that these packages are supported well? I usually drop such packages from listing On Fri, 2020-11-13 at 16:44 +0800, xiao sheng wen (肖盛文) wrote: > tags -1 + fixed pending > > > I'd committed the patch in git repo use the attachment patch. > > This patch add the package info come from oldstable and stable. > > Debian-reference will get the package info from oldstable, stable, > sid now. > > 在 2020/10/21 下午5:36, Holger Wansing 写道: > > We talk about experienced users here, but if such users are unable > > to find old versions of the debian-reference in the archive, they > > should > > better not mix up stable and oldstable (and therefore risk to break > > the next dist-upgrade and similar), since they are *not* > > experienced users, > > but - ok, I will stop that here. > > > > Holger > >
Bug#972437: debian-reference: mentions no longer existing packages
tags -1 + fixed pending I'd committed the patch in git repo use the attachment patch. This patch add the package info come from oldstable and stable. Debian-reference will get the package info from oldstable, stable, sid now. 在 2020/10/21 下午5:36, Holger Wansing 写道: > We talk about experienced users here, but if such users are unable > to find old versions of the debian-reference in the archive, they should > better not mix up stable and oldstable (and therefore risk to break > the next dist-upgrade and similar), since they are *not* experienced users, > but - ok, I will stop that here. > > Holger > -- 肖盛文 xiao sheng wen Faris Xiao 微信(wechat)：atzlinux 《铜豌豆 Linux》 基于 Debian 的 Linux 中文桌面操作系统：https://www.atzlinux.com Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=atzlinux%40sina.com GnuPG Public Key: 0x339240CB diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index fef2588..cbbb89c 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ CODE := sid ARCH := amd64 UDEBA := $(DEBM)/$(CODE) UDEBB := $(DEBM)/experimental +UDEBC := $(DEBM)/stable +UDEBD := $(DEBM)/oldstable DR_VERSION := $(shell dpkg-parsechangelog --show-field Version) # AsciiDoc source file names in $(DASC) directories for local update @@ -152,6 +154,25 @@ packages.bkup.txt: grep-dctrl -e -sPackage,Installed-Size -P "." packages.bkup.tmp > packages.bkup.txt rm packages.bkup.tmp +packages.stable.txt: + # FETCH PACKAGE (stable main) + @$(call check-command, wget, wget) + @$(call check-command, grep-dctrl, dctrl-tools) + wget -O - $(UDEBC)/main/binary-$(ARCH)/Packages.xz | xzcat - > packages.stable.tmp + grep-dctrl -e -sPackage,Installed-Size -P "." packages.stable.tmp > packages.stable.txt + rm packages.stable.tmp + +packages.oldstable.txt: + # FETCH PACKAGE (oldstable main contrib) + @$(call check-command, wget, wget) + @$(call check-command, grep-dctrl, dctrl-tools) + wget -O - $(UDEBD)/main/binary-$(ARCH)/Packages.xz | xzcat - > packages.oldstable.tmp + grep-dctrl -e -sPackage,Installed-Size -P "." packages.oldstable.tmp > packages.oldstable.txt + rm packages.oldstable.tmp + wget -O - $(UDEBD)/contrib/binary-$(ARCH)/Packages.xz | xzcat - > packages.oldstable.tmp + grep-dctrl -e -sPackage,Installed-Size -P "." packages.oldstable.tmp >> packages.oldstable.txt + rm packages.oldstable.tmp + all-popcon-results.txt: # POPCON RESULTS wget -O - $(UPOPC) | zcat - > all-popcon-results.txt @@ -220,9 +241,9 @@ popcon.ent: all-popcon-results.txt all-popcon-pkgs.txt all-popcon-submissions.tx echo "">> popcon.ent grep -e '^Package:' all-popcon-pkgs.txt | grep -f pkg.lst | $(DBIN)/popconent `cat all-popcon-submissions.txt` >> popcon.ent -pkgsize.ent: pkg.lst packages.txt packages.bkup.txt +pkgsize.ent: pkg.lst packages.txt packages.bkup.txt packages.stable.txt packages.oldstable.txt # GENERATE pkgsize.ent - sort pkg.lst | uniq | $(DBIN)/sizeent packages.txt packages.bkup.txt > pkgsize.ent + sort pkg.lst | uniq | $(DBIN)/sizeent packages.txt packages.bkup.txt packages.stable.txt packages.oldstable.txt > pkgsize.ent # POPCON wget -O - $(UPOPC) | zcat - > all-popcon-results.txt diff --git a/bin/sizeent b/bin/sizeent index 795f7aa..3ebe922 100755 --- a/bin/sizeent +++ b/bin/sizeent @@ -12,6 +12,8 @@ set -e #abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzabcdefghij packages=$1 bkups=$2 +stablepackages=$3 +oldstablepackages=$4 while read X ; do #echo "process: $X" >&2 echo -n "." >&2 @@ -23,6 +25,12 @@ while read X ; do elif SIZE=$(grep-dctrl -e -n --field=Package --show-field=Installed-Size \ --pattern="^$(echo $X|sed -e 's/\+/\\+/g')\$" $bkups ) ; then echo "" + elif SIZE=$(grep-dctrl -e -n --field=Package --show-field=Installed-Size \ +--pattern="^$(echo $X|sed -e 's/\+/\\+/g')\$" $stablepackages ) ; then +echo "" + elif SIZE=$(grep-dctrl -e -n --field=Package --show-field=Installed-Size \ +--pattern="^$(echo $X|sed -e 's/\+/\\+/g')\$" $oldstablepackages ) ; then +echo "" else echo "" echo "" >&2 OpenPGP_0x00186602339240CB.asc Description: application/pgp-keys OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#972437: debian-reference: mentions no longer existing packages
Hi, Am Mittwoch, 21. Oktober 2020 schrieb xiao sheng wen (肖盛文): > One experienced user can know the way of that install old package from > oldstable, > > but he perhaps didn't know the package ldm. [...] > > And there is no need for such logic: if you want to find how the situation > > was for an old Debian release, you can always look in an old version of > > the debian-reference. It's always there. > > There is only one version of the debian-reference in d.o now. > > If split it for different target releases (stable, testing) in d.o, > perhaps is a better way, I'm not sure. We talk about experienced users here, but if such users are unable to find old versions of the debian-reference in the archive, they should better not mix up stable and oldstable (and therefore risk to break the next dist-upgrade and similar), since they are *not* experienced users, but - ok, I will stop that here. Holger -- Sent from my Jolla phone http://www.jolla.com/
Bug#972437: debian-reference: mentions no longer existing packages
在 2020/10/21 上午2:54, Holger Wansing 写道: Hi, xiao sheng wen (肖盛文) wrote: 在 2020/10/19 下午10:57, Holger Wansing 写道: We should better remove the whole content about those packages, right? It's a easy way to fix this bug. It is of no use for Debian users anyway, if they no longer can install the corresponding packages. In stable, the Debian user can install some packages come from oldstable. In oldstable, the Debian user also can install some packages come from stable. Of course, as an experienced user/developer you can do everything. But that is not the scope of this document. As one reference manual book, keep more info is valued. For example: One experienced user can know the way of that install old package from oldstable, but he perhaps didn't know the package ldm. The knowledge about Debian is very wide scope. The oldstable still has many Debian user use it. There are package has the state like: in oldstable, not in stable, not in testing. But perhaps some day, this package can into testing again. Is this package need to remove? (If they still have the packages installed, let's say on an oldstable system, then they should read the debian-reference for *oldstable*.) The debian-reference is also publish on the www.debian.org, It's for all Debian OS Release version(Debian 9,10,11, etc,.). No, I think this is not correct. In common.ent you find the definition, what is the current stable, or the current testing. That way, every version of the debian-reference has its target releases (stable, testing), for what it matches. common.ent is only record the current state of Debian releases. Although the deb package of debian-reference is static in Debian stable releases, but debian-reference also has public to www.debian.org, the content can dynamic update in need. And the most people find the debian-reference in the website, It's the major way. IMO it makes it unnecessarily complicated, if you want to keep the content valid for all Debian releases. If things change, you would be forced to say "you find that in file xxxyyy, if you are running Jessie, or in file abcdef, if you are running Buster. And we are planning to change that again for Bullseye". And there is no need for such logic: if you want to find how the situation was for an old Debian release, you can always look in an old version of the debian-reference. It's always there. There is only one version of the debian-reference in d.o now. If split it for different target releases (stable, testing) in d.o, perhaps is a better way, I'm not sure. In this bug, "NOT_FOUND" only find in pkgsize.ent, It affect the package to display the pkgsize, the patch can fix it, it's not very complicated. Holger -- 肖盛文 xiao sheng wen Faris Xiao 微信(wechat)：atzlinux 《铜豌豆 Linux》 基于 Debian 的 Linux 中文桌面操作系统：https://www.atzlinux.com Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=atzlinux%40sina.com GnuPG Public Key: 0x339240CB
Bug#972437: debian-reference: mentions no longer existing packages
Hi, xiao sheng wen (肖盛文) wrote: > > 在 2020/10/19 下午10:57, Holger Wansing 写道: > > We should better remove the whole content about those packages, right? > It's a easy way to fix this bug. > > It is of no use for Debian users anyway, if they no longer can install the > > corresponding packages. > > In stable, the Debian user can install some packages come from oldstable. > > In oldstable, the Debian user also can install some packages come from > stable. Of course, as an experienced user/developer you can do everything. But that is not the scope of this document. > The oldstable still has many Debian user use it. > > > There are package has the state like: in oldstable, not in stable, not > in testing. > > But perhaps some day, this package can into testing again. > > Is this package need to remove? > > > (If they still have the packages installed, let's say on an oldstable > > system, then they should read the debian-reference for *oldstable*.) > > The debian-reference is also publish on the www.debian.org, It's for all > Debian OS Release version(Debian 9,10,11, etc,.). No, I think this is not correct. In common.ent you find the definition, what is the current stable, or the current testing. That way, every version of the debian-reference has its target releases (stable, testing), for what it matches. IMO it makes it unnecessarily complicated, if you want to keep the content valid for all Debian releases. If things change, you would be forced to say "you find that in file xxxyyy, if you are running Jessie, or in file abcdef, if you are running Buster. And we are planning to change that again for Bullseye". And there is no need for such logic: if you want to find how the situation was for an old Debian release, you can always look in an old version of the debian-reference. It's always there. Holger > > > > Regarding your patch: > >> @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ CODE := sid > >> ARCH := amd64 > >> UDEBA:= $(DEBM)/$(CODE) > >> UDEBB:= $(DEBM)/experimental > >> +UDEBC := $(DEBM)/buster > >> +UDEBD := $(DEBM)/stretch > >> DR_VERSION :=$(shell dpkg-parsechangelog --show-field Version) > > Those 'buster' and 'stretch' lines are error-prone, since they get outdated > > with the next release. We should not add hard-coded release-names, there are > > already too much cases existing with such hard-coded values (Debian-wide, > > not just in the debian-reference). > > Yes, hard-coded release-names there are error-prone. > > Thanks for your remind, I'll update to use stable, oldstable later. > > > > > > > Holger > > -- > 肖盛文 xiao sheng wen Faris Xiao > 微信(wechat)：atzlinux > 《铜豌豆 Linux》 > 基于 Debian 的 Linux 中文桌面操作系统：https://www.atzlinux.com > Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=atzlinux%40sina.com > GnuPG Public Key: 0x339240CB > -- Holger Wansing PGP-Fingerprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508 3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076
Bug#972437: debian-reference: mentions no longer existing packages
在 2020/10/19 下午10:57, Holger Wansing 写道: Hi, xiao sheng wen (肖盛文) wrote: hi, I create a patch to fix NOT_FOUND in pkgsize.ent. This patch add the script to get package data from Stable and Oldstable . Please help to review it. Modify is also welcome. We should better remove the whole content about those packages, right? It's a easy way to fix this bug. It is of no use for Debian users anyway, if they no longer can install the corresponding packages. In stable, the Debian user can install some packages come from oldstable. In oldstable, the Debian user also can install some packages come from stable. The oldstable still has many Debian user use it. There are package has the state like: in oldstable, not in stable, not in testing. But perhaps some day, this package can into testing again. Is this package need to remove? (If they still have the packages installed, let's say on an oldstable system, then they should read the debian-reference for *oldstable*.) The debian-reference is also publish on the www.debian.org, It's for all Debian OS Release version(Debian 9,10,11, etc,.). Regarding your patch: @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ CODE := sid ARCH := amd64 UDEBA := $(DEBM)/$(CODE) UDEBB := $(DEBM)/experimental +UDEBC := $(DEBM)/buster +UDEBD := $(DEBM)/stretch DR_VERSION := $(shell dpkg-parsechangelog --show-field Version) Those 'buster' and 'stretch' lines are error-prone, since they get outdated with the next release. We should not add hard-coded release-names, there are already too much cases existing with such hard-coded values (Debian-wide, not just in the debian-reference). Yes, hard-coded release-names there are error-prone. Thanks for your remind, I'll update to use stable, oldstable later. Holger -- 肖盛文 xiao sheng wen Faris Xiao 微信(wechat)：atzlinux 《铜豌豆 Linux》 基于 Debian 的 Linux 中文桌面操作系统：https://www.atzlinux.com Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=atzlinux%40sina.com GnuPG Public Key: 0x339240CB
Bug#972437: debian-reference: mentions no longer existing packages
Hi, xiao sheng wen (肖盛文) wrote: > hi, > > I create a patch to fix NOT_FOUND in pkgsize.ent. > > This patch add the script to get package data from Stable and Oldstable . > > Please help to review it. Modify is also welcome. We should better remove the whole content about those packages, right? It is of no use for Debian users anyway, if they no longer can install the corresponding packages. (If they still have the packages installed, let's say on an oldstable system, then they should read the debian-reference for *oldstable*.) Regarding your patch: > @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ CODE:= sid > ARCH := amd64 > UDEBA:= $(DEBM)/$(CODE) > UDEBB:= $(DEBM)/experimental > +UDEBC:= $(DEBM)/buster > +UDEBD:= $(DEBM)/stretch > DR_VERSION :=$(shell dpkg-parsechangelog --show-field Version) Those 'buster' and 'stretch' lines are error-prone, since they get outdated with the next release. We should not add hard-coded release-names, there are already too much cases existing with such hard-coded values (Debian-wide, not just in the debian-reference). Holger > 在 2020/10/19 下午5:39, xiao sheng wen (肖盛文) 写道: > > > >> > >> Moreover, when calling "make entity" there are several packages > >> mentioned as > >> no longer existing: (and they are indeed not in sid) > >> > >> > >> # GENERATE pkgsize.ent > >> sort pkg.lst | uniq | bin/sizeent packages.txt > >> packages.bkup.txt > pkgsize.ent > >> . > >> ... ERROR ...: bootchart2, probably a removed or non-amd64 package. > >> .: See > >> http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html > >> . > >> > >> > >> ... ERROR ...: dosemu, probably a removed or non-amd64 package. > >> .: See > >> http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html > >> .. > > > > In HTML files, there are links like > > https://packages.debian.org/sid/dosemu is break for these packages. > > > > How about to use url like this: > > > > https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=dosemu > > > > Also these package's pkgsize will display: > > > > NOT_FOUND > > > > The "NOT_FOUND" word is come from pkgsize.ent: > > > > pkgsize.ent: > > > > grep -c NOT_FOUND pkgsize.ent > > 15 > > > > Would you has any suggestion for this "NOT_FOUND" ? > > > > > -- > 肖盛文 xiao sheng wen Faris Xiao > 微信(wechat)：atzlinux > 《铜豌豆 Linux》 > 基于 Debian 的 Linux 中文桌面操作系统：https://www.atzlinux.com > Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=atzlinux%40sina.com > GnuPG Public Key: 0x339240CB > -- Holger Wansing PGP-Fingerprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508 3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076
Bug#972437: debian-reference: mentions no longer existing packages
hi, I create a patch to fix NOT_FOUND in pkgsize.ent. This patch add the script to get package data from Stable and Oldstable . Please help to review it. Modify is also welcome. 在 2020/10/19 下午5:39, xiao sheng wen (肖盛文) 写道: Moreover, when calling "make entity" there are several packages mentioned as no longer existing: (and they are indeed not in sid) # GENERATE pkgsize.ent sort pkg.lst | uniq | bin/sizeent packages.txt packages.bkup.txt > pkgsize.ent . ... ERROR ...: bootchart2, probably a removed or non-amd64 package. .: See http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html . ... ERROR ...: dosemu, probably a removed or non-amd64 package. .: See http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html .. In HTML files, there are links like https://packages.debian.org/sid/dosemu is break for these packages. How about to use url like this: https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=dosemu Also these package's pkgsize will display: NOT_FOUND The "NOT_FOUND" word is come from pkgsize.ent: pkgsize.ent: grep -c NOT_FOUND pkgsize.ent 15 Would you has any suggestion for this "NOT_FOUND" ? -- 肖盛文 xiao sheng wen Faris Xiao 微信(wechat)：atzlinux 《铜豌豆 Linux》 基于 Debian 的 Linux 中文桌面操作系统：https://www.atzlinux.com Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=atzlinux%40sina.com GnuPG Public Key: 0x339240CB diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index fef2588..f8b5808 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ CODE := sid ARCH := amd64 UDEBA := $(DEBM)/$(CODE) UDEBB := $(DEBM)/experimental +UDEBC := $(DEBM)/buster +UDEBD := $(DEBM)/stretch DR_VERSION := $(shell dpkg-parsechangelog --show-field Version) # AsciiDoc source file names in $(DASC) directories for local update @@ -152,6 +154,25 @@ packages.bkup.txt: grep-dctrl -e -sPackage,Installed-Size -P "." packages.bkup.tmp > packages.bkup.txt rm packages.bkup.tmp +packages.buster.txt: + # FETCH PACKAGE (buster main) + @$(call check-command, wget, wget) + @$(call check-command, grep-dctrl, dctrl-tools) + wget -O - $(UDEBC)/main/binary-$(ARCH)/Packages.xz | xzcat - > packages.buster.tmp + grep-dctrl -e -sPackage,Installed-Size -P "." packages.buster.tmp > packages.buster.txt + rm packages.buster.tmp + +packages.stretch.txt: + # FETCH PACKAGE (stretch main contrib) + @$(call check-command, wget, wget) + @$(call check-command, grep-dctrl, dctrl-tools) + wget -O - $(UDEBD)/main/binary-$(ARCH)/Packages.xz | xzcat - > packages.stretch.tmp + grep-dctrl -e -sPackage,Installed-Size -P "." packages.stretch.tmp > packages.stretch.txt + rm packages.stretch.tmp + wget -O - $(UDEBD)/contrib/binary-$(ARCH)/Packages.xz | xzcat - > packages.stretch.tmp + grep-dctrl -e -sPackage,Installed-Size -P "." packages.stretch.tmp >> packages.stretch.txt + rm packages.stretch.tmp + all-popcon-results.txt: # POPCON RESULTS wget -O - $(UPOPC) | zcat - > all-popcon-results.txt @@ -220,9 +241,9 @@ popcon.ent: all-popcon-results.txt all-popcon-pkgs.txt all-popcon-submissions.tx echo "">> popcon.ent grep -e '^Package:' all-popcon-pkgs.txt | grep -f pkg.lst | $(DBIN)/popconent `cat all-popcon-submissions.txt` >> popcon.ent -pkgsize.ent: pkg.lst packages.txt packages.bkup.txt +pkgsize.ent: pkg.lst packages.txt packages.bkup.txt packages.buster.txt packages.stretch.txt # GENERATE pkgsize.ent - sort pkg.lst | uniq | $(DBIN)/sizeent packages.txt packages.bkup.txt > pkgsize.ent + sort pkg.lst | uniq | $(DBIN)/sizeent packages.txt packages.bkup.txt packages.buster.txt packages.stretch.txt > pkgsize.ent # POPCON wget -O - $(UPOPC) | zcat - > all-popcon-results.txt diff --git a/bin/sizeent b/bin/sizeent index 795f7aa..41f171c 100755 --- a/bin/sizeent +++ b/bin/sizeent @@ -12,6 +12,8 @@ set -e #abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzabcdefghij packages=$1 bkups=$2 +busterpackages=$3 +stretchpackages=$4 while read X ; do #echo "process: $X" >&2 echo -n "." >&2 @@ -23,6 +25,12 @@ while read X ; do elif SIZE=$(grep-dctrl -e -n --field=Package --show-field=Installed-Size \ --pattern="^$(echo $X|sed -e 's/\+/\\+/g')\$" $bkups ) ; then echo "" + elif SIZE=$(grep-dctrl -e -n --field=Package --show-field=Installed-Size \ +--pattern="^$(echo $X|sed -e 's/\+/\\+/g')\$" $busterpackages ) ; then +echo "" + elif SIZE=$(grep-dctrl -e -n --field=Package --show-field=Installed-Size \ +--pattern="^$(echo $X|sed -e 's/\+/\\+/g')\$" $stretchpackages ) ; then +echo "" else echo "" echo "" >&2
Bug#972437: debian-reference: mentions no longer existing packages
在 2020/10/18 下午9:48, Holger Wansing 写道: Package: debian-reference Hi, when calling "make debian-reference.raw.xml" (let's say after an "make distclean") it fails at the replace_package step with bin/genreplace emacs>> bin/replace_package *** emacs is missing *** Commenting out the emacs line from the Makefile, it claims about another missing package: bin/genreplace libpoppler >> bin/replace_package bin/genreplace libgstreamer >> bin/replace_package bin/genreplace libphonon>> bin/replace_package *** libphonon is missing *** This is due to changed package situation for those packages: there is no emacsXY package anymore in sid (as emacs25 was in buster). And there is no libphononX package anymore in sid too (there was libphonon4 in buster). I fixed the "missing" errors in git commit 46b27cef ,welcome to review. https://salsa.debian.org/debian/debian-reference/-/commit/46b27cef6b8de97f346bc1e995672183dd71a2cc Moreover, when calling "make entity" there are several packages mentioned as no longer existing: (and they are indeed not in sid) # GENERATE pkgsize.ent sort pkg.lst | uniq | bin/sizeent packages.txt packages.bkup.txt> pkgsize.ent . ... ERROR ...: bootchart2, probably a removed or non-amd64 package. .: See http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html . ... ERROR ...: dosemu, probably a removed or non-amd64 package. .: See http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html .. In HTML files, there are links like https://packages.debian.org/sid/dosemu is break for these packages. How about to use url like this: https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=dosemu Also these package's pkgsize will display: NOT_FOUND The "NOT_FOUND" word is come from pkgsize.ent: pkgsize.ent: grep -c NOT_FOUND pkgsize.ent 15 Would you has any suggestion for this "NOT_FOUND" ? -- 肖盛文 xiao sheng wen Faris Xiao 微信(wechat)：atzlinux 《铜豌豆 Linux》 基于 Debian 的 Linux 中文桌面操作系统：https://www.atzlinux.com Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=atzlinux%40sina.com GnuPG Public Key: 0x339240CB
Bug#972437: debian-reference: mentions no longer existing packages
Package: debian-reference Hi, when calling "make debian-reference.raw.xml" (let's say after an "make distclean") it fails at the replace_package step with bin/genreplace emacs>> bin/replace_package *** emacs is missing *** Commenting out the emacs line from the Makefile, it claims about another missing package: bin/genreplace libpoppler >> bin/replace_package bin/genreplace libgstreamer >> bin/replace_package bin/genreplace libphonon>> bin/replace_package *** libphonon is missing *** This is due to changed package situation for those packages: there is no emacsXY package anymore in sid (as emacs25 was in buster). And there is no libphononX package anymore in sid too (there was libphonon4 in buster). Moreover, when calling "make entity" there are several packages mentioned as no longer existing: (and they are indeed not in sid) # GENERATE pkgsize.ent sort pkg.lst | uniq | bin/sizeent packages.txt packages.bkup.txt> pkgsize.ent . ... ERROR ...: bootchart2, probably a removed or non-amd64 package. .: See http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html . ... ERROR ...: dosemu, probably a removed or non-amd64 package. .: See http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html .. ... ERROR ...: flashplugin-nonfree, probably a removed or non-amd64 package. .: See http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html ... ... ERROR ...: icedtea-plugin, probably a removed or non-amd64 package. .: See http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html .. ... ERROR ...: ldm, probably a removed or non-amd64 package. .: See http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html ... ERROR ...: monotone, probably a removed or non-amd64 package. .: See http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html ... ... ERROR ...: ooo2dbk, probably a removed or non-amd64 package. .: See http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html ... ... ERROR ...: pybootchartgui, probably a removed or non-amd64 package. .: See http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html ... ERROR ...: rest2web, probably a removed or non-amd64 package. .: See http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html ... ERROR ...: squid3, probably a removed or non-amd64 package. .: See http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html .. ... ERROR ...: syslog-summary, probably a removed or non-amd64 package. .: See http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html .. ... ERROR ...: uswsusp, probably a removed or non-amd64 package. .: See http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html ... ERROR ...: vdmfec, probably a removed or non-amd64 package. .: See http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html .. ... ERROR ...: zenmap, probably a removed or non-amd64 package. .: See http://packages.qa.debian.org/common/index.html Holger -- Holger Wansing PGP-Fingerprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508 3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076
Bug#972437: debian-reference: mentions no longer existing packages
I also meet these errors in my local computer. Is need to update Makefile and other files? -- 肖盛文 xiao sheng wen Faris Xiao 微信(wechat)：atzlinux 《铜豌豆 Linux》 基于 Debian 的 Linux 中文桌面操作系统：https://www.atzlinux.com Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=atzlinux%40sina.com GnuPG Public Key: 0x339240CB
