在 2020/10/19 下午10:57, Holger Wansing 写道:
Hi,
xiao sheng wen (肖盛文) <atzli...@sina.com> wrote:
hi,
I create a patch to fix NOT_FOUND in pkgsize.ent.
This patch add the script to get package data from Stable and Oldstable .
Please help to review it. Modify is also welcome.
We should better remove the whole content about those packages, right?
It's a easy way to fix this bug.
It is of no use for Debian users anyway, if they no longer can install the
corresponding packages.
In stable, the Debian user can install some packages come from oldstable.
In oldstable, the Debian user also can install some packages come from
stable.
The oldstable still has many Debian user use it.
There are package has the state like: in oldstable, not in stable, not
in testing.
But perhaps some day, this package can into testing again.
Is this package need to remove?
(If they still have the packages installed, let's say on an oldstable
system, then they should read the debian-reference for *oldstable*.)
The debian-reference is also publish on the www.debian.org, It's for all Debian
OS Release version(Debian 9,10,11, etc,.).
Regarding your patch:
@@ -73,6 +73,8 @@ CODE := sid
ARCH := amd64
UDEBA := $(DEBM)/$(CODE)
UDEBB := $(DEBM)/experimental
+UDEBC := $(DEBM)/buster
+UDEBD := $(DEBM)/stretch
DR_VERSION := $(shell dpkg-parsechangelog --show-field Version)
Those 'buster' and 'stretch' lines are error-prone, since they get outdated
with the next release. We should not add hard-coded release-names, there are
already too much cases existing with such hard-coded values (Debian-wide,
not just in the debian-reference).
Yes, hard-coded release-names there are error-prone.
Thanks for your remind, I'll update to use stable, oldstable later.
Holger
--
肖盛文 xiao sheng wen Faris Xiao
微信(wechat)：atzlinux
《铜豌豆 Linux》
基于 Debian 的 Linux 中文桌面操作系统：https://www.atzlinux.com
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=atzlinux%40sina.com
GnuPG Public Key: 0x339240CB
