On Sat, Dec 06, 2014 at 09:44:44PM +0100, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Le 22/10/2014 12:01, Bill Allombert a écrit : > > > Do you have an example in mind ? > > Hi Bill, an example is the jenkins-common package, it declares a > Built-Using field with: > > Built-Using: acegi-security (= 1.0.7-3), bouncycastle (= 1.49+dfsg-3), > commons-httpclient (= 3.1-10.2), guice (= 4.0~beta5-1), > jenkins-ant-plugin (= 1.2-1), jenkins-antisamy-markup-formatter-plugin > (= 1.2-1), jenkins-mailer-plugin (= 1.11-1), jenkins-matrix-auth-plugin > (= 1.2-1), jenkins-matrix-project-plugin (= 1.3-1), jenkins-winstone (= > 2.8-1), libcommons-fileupload-java (= 1.3.1-1), libspring-java (= > 3.0.6.RELEASE-17), stapler (= 1.231-1) > > > This kind of dependency adjustement is done on the server side, not on the > > client (it is done for Depends already), but yes this can be done. > > There is a catch though, as the Built-Using field can only track the > source packages and not the binary packages. So unless there is a 1:1 > relation between the source package and the binary package it's not > possible to adjust the counter properly (maybe it would make sense to > allow the Built-Using field to specify binary packages btw).
The server scripts is already doing source<->binary matching and produces statistic by source packages, so we maybe could add 'Source: acegi-security' to the final report if needed. The real issue is not to count the same dependency twice. Are you interested to work on that ? the relevant files are examples/bin/popanal.py (to generate Source: acegi-security fields) and examples/bin/popcon.pl (to add the Source value to the 'Statistics by source packages') Cheers, -- Bill. <ballo...@debian.org> Imagine a large red swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org