> George Danchev wrote: > > I've recently done a little survey about the fields used in our control > > files (*_Release files excluded). Currently there are ~80 different > > fields [1] used in testing and unstable, which basically fall into these > > groups: > > Looks like you did not include udebs in your survey, which use: > XB-Installer-Menu-Item (some: XB-installer-menu-item) > XB-Kernel-Version > XB-Subarchitecture > XC-Package-Type (some: XB-Package-Type)
You are correct, I missed these either because dpkg-scanpackages has not been invoked with -tudeb or udebs are not built for the official archive. I'll investigate further how to tackle these as well. > and: > Submit-As (in installation-report; apparently used by reportbug?) That is interesting indeed, as it is actually found in: bug/installation-report/control:Submit-As: installation-reports I forgot to mention that I didn't actually dissected all source packages themselves, but processed the meta information instead as provided by: /var/lib/dpkg/available /var/lib/apt/lists/*_Packages /var/lib/apt/lists/*_Sources /var/lib/dpkg/status here it is: http://people.debian.org/~danchev/survey/run_survey -- pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB <people.fccf.net/danchev/key pgp.mit.edu> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
