Hello, (please CC me on replies)
the other day the source for linux-modules-di-arm-2.6 was accidentally
removed from unstable. Luckily britney scripts were able to catch this
and send an alert, and the source package was reinjected from the pool
into the database.
This happened because ftpmaster's tool that detects obsolete source
packages apparently doesn't cope well with different source packages
providing the same binary packages in different architectures, which is
the case between linux-modules-di-arm-2.6 and linux-modules-di-armel-2.6.
I think it's clear that the cruft tool should be patched not to propose
removal of such source packages, but although ftpmaster is open to
patches, somebody has to produce them. Because of this, I'm asking: is
there a technical reason that mandates to have split source packages for
linux-modules-di between arm and armel? Would it be appropriate to merge
the two?
Thanks in advance for any comments,
--
Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org
Listening to: Joaquín Sabina - Cuando aprieta el frío
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
