Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> I went and grabbed all the Packages files for all the distributions
> I know of (main, contrib, non-free, non-us/main, non-us/contrib,
> non-us/non-free), and went and checked wether all the dependencies
> can be satisfied. As it turns out, there are many packages referencing
> other non-existant packages.
GREAT!!!
> Should I file bugs and if so, what type?
Bugs need to be filed, though they need proper investigation.
> fortify => fotify-win32
Looks like a bug in fortify
> fvwmconf => fvwm2 (yes! fvwm2 doesn't exist)
Where is fvwm2 gone to?
> kernel-source-* => gas (there is no gas package)
bug in kernel-source-*
> gstep-{base,base-dbg,xgps} are all not there
Who needs them?
> jdk1.2{,-native} don't exist
ditto
I guess there are packages newer than jdk1.2 or named differently
or there is a virtual package, thus packages depending on these
packages will have to use the new names, thus they're bugy.
etc...
> A few places reference qt1g (should be libqt1g)
File a bug, recompile should be enough.
> emacsspeak mentions many tclx packages which do not exist
bad.
Regards,
Joey
--
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct,
not tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth
Please always Cc to me when replying to me on the lists.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
