Debian Developers - Re: Bug#365087: ITP: debcheck -- Checks whether dependencies of debian packages can be

This is Interesting: Free IT Magazines  
Home > Archive > Debian Developers > April 2006 > Re: Bug#365087: ITP: debcheck -- Checks whether dependencies of debian packages can be





You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread. To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to this thread please [click here]

Author Re: Bug#365087: ITP: debcheck -- Checks whether dependencies of debian packages can be
Stefano Zacchiroli

2006-04-27, 7:27 pm

On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 09:53:20PM +0200, Ralf Treinen wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Ralf Treinen <treinen@debian.org>
>
> * Package name : debcheck
> Version : as of 2006/3/19
> Upstream Author : Jerome Vouillon <Jerome.Vouillon@pps.jussieu.fr>
> * URL : http://www.pps.jussieu.fr/~vouillon/
> * License : GPL
> programming Lang: Objective Caml
> Description : Checks whether dependencies of debian packages can besatisfied
>
> This software checks for every package of a distribution (in the
> debian format .deb) whether it is possible to satisfy its dependencies
> and conflicts within this distribution.


Looking at the docs the tool seems to be able to work on any set of
debian packages provided as Packages entries provided on standard input.
I would thus rephrase the above paragraph as:

This software checks for a set of Debian packages (provided as
Packages entries) whether it is possible to satisfy the dependencies
and conflicts of all involved packages within the set.

Better to ask for an advice of a native English speaker, but my point is
to emphasize "the set of packages" rather then "the distribution".

> Preliminary packages are available at
> http://people.debian.org/~treinen/debcheck/


I suggest to add to the manpage an hint that the Packages file is a
suitable input for the tool.

I saw that there is also an rpmcheck tool, which does the same for .rpm
packages. Don't you plan to package this as well? What about providing
an unique binary package (maybe called "pkgcheck") with the two
binaries?

If you are worried about the size: upstream links them separately and
they are 130 Kb each, but I'm pretty confident that linking a single
executable with two different names and the usual speculation about
Sys.argv.(0) would dramatically cut down the total size ...

Cheers.

--
Stefano Zacchiroli -*- Computer Science PhD student @ Uny Bologna, Italy
zack@{cs.unibo.it,debian.org,bononia.it} -%- http://www.bononia.it/zack/
If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity
of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. -!-

Sponsored Links






Free braindumps | Software forum | Database administration forum

Copyright 2003 - 2009 webservertalk.com