On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 04:25:23PM +0100, Berke Durak wrote: > Hello, > > We are collecting Debian metadata daily and running installability > checks. For instance, today, 1.3% of the packages in unstable/i386 are > broken. The worst in the past 3 months has been on September 10th and > 11th with 7.8% and 7.7% of packages broken in unstable. These were > particularly bad days for upgrading your packages. This data can > be browsed online at :
Hello Berke, I find this kind of global analysis extremly interesting, because we tend to see the distribution as a set of packages and miss the big picture. However, I am unsure what "broken" above means? Is not the whole purpose of dependencies is to prevent upgrades to break packages ? Why would a package be 'broken' because if depend on packages that are not yet in sid ? Cheers, -- Bill. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Imagine a large red swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
