On Thu, 21 Jun 2007, Peter Samuelson wrote: > > [Raphael Hertzog] > > If you encounter any strangeness, please report it so that we can > > check. Those warnings could be the base of some mass-bug filings > > althought we might want to start with the second one (those are real > > bugs, while the other are not creating any technical problem (except > > useless dependencies)). > > Please do not file bugs for unnecessary linking _except_ where this > actually changes the Depends line. In many cases upstream might link > several binaries against a fixed list of libraries, where not every > binary needs every library. This is generally quite annoying to "fix", > and is not worth the trouble, since it doesn't affect package > relationships or install/remove/upgrade scenarios.
Ack. I should add a similar warning at the package level instead of at the binary level. > Also, please omit @Base from the log messages, it adds visual clutter > without adding information. Well, it can be worthwhile to know which version the symbol is attached to. If I remove it, I only remove @Base and not @GLIBC_2.4 or any other versions. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux : http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
