On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:43:16 +0900,
Junichi Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you claim to have rewritten my awk script in perl,
> you should have done something which checks the
> deps AND the builddeps.
Now count-depends-field looks for both dependency and
build-dependency by default.
top
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit
> scp auric.debian.org:~tausq/bdepvis ./
>
> However, perhaps tausq should put this file in his public_html... not?
Heh, maybe, maybe not.
There could be an assortment of build-related tools package.
This is what I'm aiming at creating at s
Oohara Yuuma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit
> On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:24:54 +0900,
> Junichi Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Also, please change the name of your package, because it is confusing,
> Rename to what? "count-depends-field"? Any suggestion?
That sounds more decent.
>
On Wed, 12 Sep 2001, Oohara Yuuma wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Sep 2001 15:13:50 -0700,
> Randolph Chung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > auric:~tausq/bdepvis if anyone is interested.
> I can't find it. http://auric.debian.org/~tausq/ shows no
> file named "bdepvis".
That's not what's meant.
it's written
On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 14:24:54 +0900,
Junichi Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Also, please change the name of your package, because it is confusing,
Rename to what? "count-depends-field"? Any suggestion?
> and does something different.
Something like this?
# package tkdvi
# * level 0
# ** sear
On Tue, 11 Sep 2001 15:13:50 -0700,
Randolph Chung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> auric:~tausq/bdepvis if anyone is interested.
I can't find it. http://auric.debian.org/~tausq/ shows no
file named "bdepvis".
--
Oohara Yuuma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Graduate-school of Science, Kyoto University
PGP Key h
Oohara Yuuma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit
> Depends list
> http://www.interq.or.jp/libra/oohara/analyse-packages/result-packages.txt.bz2
And this is the same kind of thing as
http://auric.debian.org/~tausq/buildd/ia64-latest.html
> Build-Depends list
> http://www.interq.or.jp/libra/oo
Oohara Yuuma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit
> > values. These things should have had trouble when porting to new arches,
> > but anyway, I have put the script up on
> > http://mikilab.doshisha.ac.jp/~dancer/analyse-sourcepackages
> I rewrote it from scratch in Perl.
No, you have written a
On Tue, 11 Sep 2001 20:01:38 +0200 (CEST),
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Sep 2001, Oohara Yuuma wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 7 Sep 2001 00:11:28 +0900,
> > Junichi Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I was writing a script to see how m
On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 09:06:04AM +0900, Oohara Yuuma wrote:
> libc6-dev (Source: glibc) has Build-Depends: gcc-3.0-sparc64 [sparc] .
> gcc-3.0-sparc64 (Source: gcc-3.0) has Build-Depends-Indep: doxygen .
You are correct. I had overlooked Build-Depends-Indep in my manual scan.
--
- mdz
On Tue, 11 Sep 2001 17:42:36 -0400,
Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 02:43:36AM +0900, Oohara Yuuma wrote:
>
> > [snip binary package dependencies]
> >
> > The number of the *binary* packages that Build-Depends on a package:
> > ./analyse-sources.perl | sort -n -
> As I anticipated, it has a lot of "loops", and it is going in ridiculous
> values. These things should have had trouble when porting to new arches,
> but anyway, I have put the script up on
> http://mikilab.doshisha.ac.jp/~dancer/analyse-sourcepackages
neato i had written something somewhat
On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 02:43:36AM +0900, Oohara Yuuma wrote:
> [snip binary package dependencies]
>
> The number of the *binary* packages that Build-Depends on a package:
> ./analyse-sources.perl | sort -n -r
> 5208 libncurses-dev
> 5203 libgc5-dev
> 5203 doxygen
I suspect a bug here. I can onl
On Wed, 12 Sep 2001, Oohara Yuuma wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Sep 2001 00:11:28 +0900,
> Junichi Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I was writing a script to see how much a package is depended upon,
> > i. e. cumulatively culculating Reverse-Build-Deps, and
> > Reverse-de
On Fri, 7 Sep 2001 00:11:28 +0900,
Junichi Uekawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was writing a script to see how much a package is depended upon,
> i. e. cumulatively culculating Reverse-Build-Deps, and
> Reverse-dependencies. However, I thought it might be useful to see
> wha
Eric Van Buggenhaut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit
> > 29400691 docbook
>
> Uh ?
There was a flaw of logic, as it were.
It should be something around 3000-1. I presume.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~]$ grep-available -F Depends -s Package docbook
> Package: cygnus-stylesheets
> Package: d
On Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 12:11:28AM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
>
> I was writing a script to see how much a package is depended upon,
> i. e. cumulatively culculating Reverse-Build-Deps, and
> Reverse-dependencies. However, I thought it might be useful
Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit
> > As I anticipated, it has a lot of "loops", and it is going in ridiculous
> > values. These things should have had trouble when porting to new arches,
>
> Hell, they did! It took ages to become somewhat self-contained Debian wise.
> One
On Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 12:11:28AM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> As I anticipated, it has a lot of "loops", and it is going in ridiculous
> values. These things should have had trouble when porting to new arches,
Hell, they did! It took ages to become somewhat self-contained Debian wise.
One pro
On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit
>
> > > 3.24463e+09 liburi-perl
> >
> > You need to debug your script. We don't have this much packages in any of
> > our archives. Not even...
> >
> > [...]
> > > 29169746 readline4
> >
> > ...
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> immo vero scripsit
> > 3.24463e+09 liburi-perl
>
> You need to debug your script. We don't have this much packages in any of
> our archives. Not even...
>
> [...]
> > 29169746 readline4
>
> ... this much.
>
I think this signifies that packages depend on its
On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
>
> I was writing a script to see how much a package is depended upon,
> i. e. cumulatively culculating Reverse-Build-Deps, and
> Reverse-dependencies. However, I thought it might be useful to see
> what kind of
Hello,
I was writing a script to see how much a package is depended upon,
i. e. cumulatively culculating Reverse-Build-Deps, and
Reverse-dependencies. However, I thought it might be useful to see
what kind of packages have a "weight", i.e. needs fixing first for
packages to ente
23 matches
Mail list logo
