On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Robert Park <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Barry Warsaw <email@example.com> wrote:This number doesn't tell the whole story. Remember debian has a long
> [*] % grep '^Package: ' /var/lib/apt/lists/*_Sources | wc -l
> 920 / 43047 =~ 2%
tail of packages that are very obscure / niche. It may be 2% of the
whole, but I would guess that it's like 80% of popular desktop
packages. I don't think I've *ever* branched a UDD branch and found it
to be current. In fact every SRU I've tried to do based on UDD failed
because it regressed some previous release that didn't make it into
the UDD branch.
I disagree here. I've found it to be the opposite. Almost all the UDD branches I pull are current and it's the rare exception that they are not for things in R-S-T. I've had little to no issues with them. However, I've found that many of the precise ones are broken, which does match your SRU experience. Unity was one I ran into yesterday being broken for precise. It claims current but fails to branch with an esoteric launchpad error message. This happened to me with another package in precise last week also.
Ubuntu-motu mailing list
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu