Hi, Quoting Kurt Roeckx (2014-07-09 00:36:37) > On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 01:51:00PM +0200, Johannes Schauer wrote: > > Kurt Roeckx <k...@roeckx.be> > > libtool > > ==> libtool_2.4.2-1.7.arch-all.unusedbd <== > gfortran=4:4.8.2-4 > > gfortran Depends on gfortran-4.8, and that is being used.
indeed this is then a false positive of a nearly-meta package. Unfortunately the gfortran package does ship some files besides /usr/share/doc (both symlinks) and would thus not be classified as a meta package. Maybe I should also check debtags. gfortran is tagged role::dummy. I also found role::metapackage. Is there another debtag or method in general that would allow to consider the dependencies of a package instead and avoid this kind of false positive? Maybe a package shipping only symlinks besides /usr/share/doc is another way of finding meta packages. On the other hand it's harder to check the type of file a package ships as it needs downloading and unpacking first. I'm not aware whether tools like apt-file display information about the file type. > > > openssl (U) > ==> openssl_1.0.1g-4.arch-all.unusedbd <== > m4=1.4.17-4 > > >From the changelog: > * Add Build-Dependency on m4, since sparc needs it to generate > it's assembler files. (Closes: #334542) Then it makes sense that my amd64 build caught that. Could you make m4 an architecture specific dependency if it's only used on sparc? cheers, josch -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140709043719.14505.38892@hoothoot
