On 18/08/15 00:37, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 01:46:16PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote: >> Having done more rebuilds in Ubuntu, it would be great if you could >> publish a complete list of the transitions you believe to be necessary > > Here's the count of source packages in Ubuntu wily that produce binary > packages ending in 'v5', which is probably a good approximation
Thanks, I have added them to <https://titanpad.com/UtA5km2wW6> so we can hopefully get a better picture of what needs to be done. For the items that are still to-do or undecided, I've been adding reverse dependency counts to that list, using max(broken build-depends, source packages with broken depends) from a dak command like "dak rm -R -n adplug", so that people can see whether they are "almost leaf" packages or not. In most cases the answer is that they have < 10 direct rdeps, which strikes me as getting into "fix it later" territory. hunspell is one notable exception, if it does indeed need renaming (I haven't verified) I think we might be at or approaching a point where it is worthwhile to schedule a significant number of binNMUs and make more of unstable installable again, without needing to re-binNMU too many of the same packages later? For instance, the ilmbase -> openexr -> opencv stack are all fixed in unstable, and so are most of the glibmm stack (e.g. gtkmm). S
