Re: stats on the number of packages in various releases

On Mon, 13 Apr 2009, Steffen Moeller wrote: though at list plink is missing here, plink is in the list of recommends - what do you mean? and so is infernal that is in experimental and such in non-free, Adding packages whi are in experimental exclusively should not be added to the Recommend

Re: comments on suggest line of med-bio-dev

On Mon, 13 Apr 2009, Steffen Moeller wrote: Suggests: aceperl should this possibly be "libace-perl" ? Yes and that's fixed in SVN as you can see at http://debian-med.alioth.debian.org/tasks/bio-dev.html#libace-perl The problem will be fixed soon (really soon - we just need

comments on suggest line of med-bio-dev

Hello, sorry for being unequally distributed with my feedback. But at least here is some. Taken from apt-cache show med-bio-dev: Recommends: bioperl, libajax5-dev, libbio-mage-perl, libbio-ruby, libgenome-1.3-1, libgo-perl, libncbi6-dev, libnucleus5-dev, libqsearch-dev, libvibrant6-dev, mcl, py

stats on the number of packages in various releases

Hello, I was interested in numbers and how they changed over distributions. Here is what I came up with when I followed the "Recommends" of the med-bio package: oldstable : 34 stable : 43 testing : 43 unstable : 43 though at list plink is missing here, and so is infernal that is in e