Re: Bug#560778: #560778 apt-listchanges: depends on things in optional, which depend on things in extra
Hi, On Donnerstag, 11. März 2010, Julian Andres Klode wrote: > > python-apt in lenny and squeeze still depend on lsb-release, which is > > extra. The version in sid (migration due in 5 days) only recommends it. > > python-apt 0.7.93.2 migrated to testing. So the time is right for promoting apt-listchanges to standard? cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Bug#560778: #560778 apt-listchanges: depends on things in optional, which depend on things in extra
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 06:14:56PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote: > Hi, > > On Dienstag, 26. Januar 2010, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > > All in all (and unless I've missed something), the choice seems to be > > relatively self contained. We would "just" need to promote to standard > > python-support and python-apt. > > python-apt in lenny and squeeze still depend on lsb-release, which is extra. > The version in sid (migration due in 5 days) only recommends it. python-apt 0.7.93.2 migrated to testing. I have also uploaded 0.7.94 to unstable, which reduces the size by moving the documentation into its own package. This new version depends on python2.6, but this was a mistake and is already fixed in bzr. -- Julian Andres Klode - Debian Developer, Ubuntu Member See http://wiki.debian.org/JulianAndresKlode and http://jak-linux.org/. pgpastiW8iq0K.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: #560778 apt-listchanges: depends on things in optional, which depend on things in extra
reassign 560778 ftp.debian.org retitle 560778 "please promote python-apt and python-support to standard" severity 560778 important thanks signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: #560778 apt-listchanges: depends on things in optional, which depend on things in extra
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 18:14:56 +0100, Holger Levsen wrote: > Hi, > > On Dienstag, 26. Januar 2010, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > > All in all (and unless I've missed something), the choice seems to be > > relatively self contained. We would "just" need to promote to standard > > python-support and python-apt. > > python-apt in lenny and squeeze still depend on lsb-release, which is extra. > The version in sid (migration due in 5 days) only recommends it. > > So, what's the correct way to promote python-apt and python-support to > standard? Filing bugs against those packages and block this bug by them? > As I already said, downgrade the severity of this bug, reassign to ftp.d.o, and retitle. Cheers, Julien -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: #560778 apt-listchanges: depends on things in optional, which depend on things in extra
Hi, On Dienstag, 26. Januar 2010, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > All in all (and unless I've missed something), the choice seems to be > relatively self contained. We would "just" need to promote to standard > python-support and python-apt. python-apt in lenny and squeeze still depend on lsb-release, which is extra. The version in sid (migration due in 5 days) only recommends it. So, what's the correct way to promote python-apt and python-support to standard? Filing bugs against those packages and block this bug by them? regards, Holge, TBTRTFM signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: #560778 apt-listchanges: depends on things in optional, which depend on things in extra
On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 13:33:32 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > All in all (and unless I've missed something), the choice seems to be > relatively self contained. We would "just" need to promote to standard > python-support and python-apt. For reference, on amd64 the total > installed-size of the 2 is about 4 MB (not considering the *.pyc which > will be compiled on the fly by python-support, which I don't know how to > evaluate). you can use "sys.dont_write_bytecode = True" in python >= 2.6 to disable writing of pyc files to conserve disk space. however, startup will always be slower due to the missing precompiled bytecode. mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: #560778 apt-listchanges: depends on things in optional, which depend on things in extra
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 01:33:32PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 12:49:46PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > > I'd object to this. I believe apt-listchanges needs to be in the > > default install. If that means moving python-support and python-apt to > > standard as well, that sounds like a pretty cheap price to pay. So I > > think this bug should be downgraded and reassigned to ftp.d.o. > > The only apparent resulting silliness of all this would be have two > python runtime helper in standard (-central and -support), but that's > already the case today on all real-life installations which require a > handful of Python application. We won't be adding much more by pushing > that to standard. Prominent members of the Python teams reached consensus (AFAICS) that python-support is the better option and there were already proposals to even include its functionallity in dh_python some day. Maybe we can get rid of python-central or python-support (or both) some time after the Squeeze release. I support the suggestion to move python-support and python-apt to standard. Regards Jan -- Jan Dittberner - Debian Developer GPG-key: 4096R/558FB8DD 2009-05-10 B2FF 1D95 CE8F 7A22 DF4C F09B A73E 0055 558F B8DD http://ddportfolio.debian.net/ - http://people.debian.org/~jandd/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: #560778 apt-listchanges: depends on things in optional, which depend on things in extra
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 12:49:46PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote: > I'd object to this. I believe apt-listchanges needs to be in the > default install. If that means moving python-support and python-apt to > standard as well, that sounds like a pretty cheap price to pay. So I > think this bug should be downgraded and reassigned to ftp.d.o. I concur with this position. To give some more data, I've been looking at the details of what would need additional promotion to priority standard, e.g. by transitivity. python-support depends on: python, dpkg -> both are already at least priority standard, no issue here python-apt depends *additionally* on: python-central, libapt-inst-libc6.9-6-1.1, libapt-pkg-libc6.9-6-4.8, libc6, libgcc1, libstdc++6 -> python-central is already priority standard -> libapt-inst-libc6.9-6-1.1 is provided by apt-utils, which is priority important (no issue then) -> libapt-pkg-libc6.9-6-4.8 is provided by apt (again: no issue) -> the latter 3 are obviously no issue All in all (and unless I've missed something), the choice seems to be relatively self contained. We would "just" need to promote to standard python-support and python-apt. For reference, on amd64 the total installed-size of the 2 is about 4 MB (not considering the *.pyc which will be compiled on the fly by python-support, which I don't know how to evaluate). The only apparent resulting silliness of all this would be have two python runtime helper in standard (-central and -support), but that's already the case today on all real-life installations which require a handful of Python application. We won't be adding much more by pushing that to standard. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7 z...@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/ Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..| . |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie sempre uno zaino ...| ..: | Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: #560778 apt-listchanges: depends on things in optional, which depend on things in extra
Julien Cristau (26/01/2010): > I'd object to this. I believe apt-listchanges needs to be in the > default install. Seconded. Mraw, KiBi. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: #560778 apt-listchanges: depends on things in optional, which depend on things in extra
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 12:20:50 +0100, Holger Levsen wrote: > The packages apt-listchanges depends on which are not priority standard are > python-support and python-apt. > > Somehow I doubt that apt-listchanges will be rewritten soon to work without > them, so I thought I gather input whether there are objections to change the > priority back to optional (or extra?) and be done with the RC bug for > squeeze. > I'd object to this. I believe apt-listchanges needs to be in the default install. If that means moving python-support and python-apt to standard as well, that sounds like a pretty cheap price to pay. So I think this bug should be downgraded and reassigned to ftp.d.o. Cheers, Julien -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
#560778 apt-listchanges: depends on things in optional, which depend on things in extra
Hi, going through the list of RC bugs in squeeze, I noticed #560778: --- From: Ron To: Debian Bug Tracking System Subject: apt-listchanges: depends on things in optional, which depend on things in extra Date: Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:22:09 +1030 Package: apt-listchanges Version: 2.83+nmu1 Severity: serious Justification: Policy 2.5 Hi, I see from the changelog that moving this to standard priority was discussed on devel nearly 2 years ago now. Currently however the chain of dependencies that it drags in extend all the way down into extra. As much as it would be nice to have this functionality by default, I'm not really sure we also want to drag all of those extra things (and the things that they may later also drag in) to the standard system. If people really want this as standard, perhaps they should consider instead implementing it in a manner that only depends on existing standard packages. Maybe even making it a standard feature of apt itself. Cheers, Ron --- The packages apt-listchanges depends on which are not priority standard are python-support and python-apt. Somehow I doubt that apt-listchanges will be rewritten soon to work without them, so I thought I gather input whether there are objections to change the priority back to optional (or extra?) and be done with the RC bug for squeeze. (For squeeze+1 I'd also like to see apt-listchanges be standard, but still then, somebody would need to do the work...) cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.