On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 07:36:47PM +0100, Mehdi Dogguy wrote: > Le 2012-11-20 15:31, Iain Lane a écrit : > >On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 02:02:04PM +0100, Stéphane Glondu wrote: > >>Le 19/11/2012 13:23, Iain Lane a écrit : > >>> [...] The deduplication is required not for ben but > >>> for edos-debcheck (it's interested in finding solutions in the > >>whole > >>> repository but for the transition case we only want to know about > >>> solutions involving the newest packages). [...] > >> > >>ben should deduplicate packages before piping them into > >>edos-debcheck. > >>Can you provide a test case where it does not? > > > >I'm using a slightly older version, 0.6.1. So if deduplication is > >a part > >of newer versions then that's great (I'll try to find some time to > >check > >it out soon). I don't believe partial suite support is, but that > >becomes > >a simpler matter if you already have the deduping code. :-) > > > > IIRC, the dedupe code was there since ever (at least, before the first > upload to Debian).
I lied, we're running a pre-package version (it's proving hard to get this updated because of having to go through sysadmins) which doesn't pass the deduped stuff to debcheck (just gives the filename): http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=collab-maint/ben.git;a=blob;f=lib/benl_utils.ml;h=4c58182e7e97020188fb5b1a6d1f549167bb0402;hb=78fe204f2a51f362d088f29507b3f372167fb8e4#l33 but later versions do it right, at least by source inspection. So that's cool. Don't worry about that part of my initial mail. :-) -- Iain Lane [ i...@orangesquash.org.uk ] Debian Developer [ la...@debian.org ] Ubuntu Developer [ la...@ubuntu.com ]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
