[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [gNewSense-users] Add/Remove... suggestion to install or work with n

From: Sam Geeraerts
Subject: Re: [gNewSense-users] Add/Remove... suggestion to install or work with non-free software
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 23:41:18 +0200
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20090318)

Karl Goetz schreef:
On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 20:38:43 +0200
Sam Geeraerts <address@hidden> wrote:

Karl Goetz schreef:
On Sun, 24 May 2009 10:22:50 +0300
Niklas Cholmkvist <address@hidden> wrote:

It turns out that there already was a bug report for this [1]. I've updated it with rms' comment.

Grepping Builder for "ndiswrapper" finds nothing and the link to the patch in the bug report is dead, so I presume we have no "current
code" for it. I'm not sure why the bug report has NeedsInfo status.

Btw, I'm debmirroring as I type this, so I'll hopefully be able to
help out soon.

(For the lists benefit:)
For single source:binary packages its really easy. A line like this
should remove the package.

DONT_CHROOT=1 ensure_updated helix-player helix-player $RELEASE$i
"./remove-package helix-player" ''

ensure updated is a function we define with the following parametres:
function ensure_updated {
# Parameters: # $1 Upstream binary package name
    # $2 Our binary package name
    # $3 Release
    # $4 Build script
    # $5 Version in ./config

I'm not sure how this relates to source packages with multiple binary
packages - guess we'll find out :)

I've looked at Builder some more: './remove-package FOO' comes down to 'reprepro remove FOO', which deletes the FOO source and binary packages. E.g.: ./remove-package firefox-3.0 means that you can't 'apt-get install firefox-3.0' or 'apt-get source firefox-3.0', but you still can 'apt-get install firefox-3.0-dom-inspector' (which is a binary from the firefox-3.0 source package).

Disclaimer: this is an educated guess, not tested in practice.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]