Re: Upcoming Section changes in the archive (deborphan)

2009-03-01 Thread Carsten Hey
On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 10:14:34AM +0100, Bernhard R. Link wrote: > * Carsten Hey [090228 19:21]: > > > It shouldn't be anything harder than adding 'deprecated' > > > (non-library, deprecated software) to complement oldlibs, > > > > Adding non-library packages to oldlibs would cause these to be >

Re: Upcoming Section changes in the archive (deborphan)

2009-03-01 Thread Bernhard R. Link
* Carsten Hey [090228 19:21]: > > It shouldn't be anything harder than adding 'deprecated' > > (non-library, deprecated software) to complement oldlibs, > > Adding non-library packages to oldlibs would cause these to be handled > like a library by deborphan and thus possibly being falsely displaye

Re: Upcoming Section changes in the archive (deborphan)

2009-02-28 Thread Carsten Hey
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 01:03:39PM +0100, Enrico Zini wrote: > On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 10:03:55PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > There are tools that understand the special meaning of the 'oldlibs' > > section and treat it specially; at least deborphan comes to mind, > > there may be others. I d