• 85 Posts
  • 394 Comments
Joined 10 months ago
cake
Cake day: April 2nd, 2025

help-circle





  • Looks like that package was removed from Debian. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was due to not following Debian policy.

    Here are the first 100 entries:

    $ apt-cache show librust-winapi-dev |grep ^Provides: |sed "s/Provides: "// |sed "s/, /\\n/g" |sed "s/ .*//g" |sort -V  |head -100
    librust-winapi+accctrl-dev
    librust-winapi+aclapi-dev
    librust-winapi+activation-dev
    librust-winapi+adhoc-dev
    librust-winapi+appmgmt-dev
    librust-winapi+audioclient-dev
    librust-winapi+audiosessiontypes-dev
    librust-winapi+avrt-dev
    librust-winapi+basetsd-dev
    librust-winapi+bcrypt-dev
    librust-winapi+bits1-5-dev
    librust-winapi+bits2-0-dev
    librust-winapi+bits2-5-dev
    librust-winapi+bits3-0-dev
    librust-winapi+bits4-0-dev
    librust-winapi+bits5-0-dev
    librust-winapi+bits10-1-dev
    librust-winapi+bitscfg-dev
    librust-winapi+bitsmsg-dev
    librust-winapi+bits-dev
    librust-winapi+bluetoothapis-dev
    librust-winapi+bluetoothleapis-dev
    librust-winapi+bthdef-dev
    librust-winapi+bthioctl-dev
    librust-winapi+bthledef-dev
    librust-winapi+bthsdpdef-dev
    librust-winapi+bugcodes-dev
    librust-winapi+cderr-dev
    librust-winapi+cfgmgr32-dev
    librust-winapi+cfg-dev
    librust-winapi+cguid-dev
    librust-winapi+combaseapi-dev
    librust-winapi+coml2api-dev
    librust-winapi+commapi-dev
    librust-winapi+commctrl-dev
    librust-winapi+commdlg-dev
    librust-winapi+commoncontrols-dev
    librust-winapi+consoleapi-dev
    librust-winapi+corecrt-dev
    librust-winapi+corsym-dev
    librust-winapi+d2d1effectauthor-dev
    librust-winapi+d2d1effects-1-dev
    librust-winapi+d2d1effects-2-dev
    librust-winapi+d2d1effects-dev
    librust-winapi+d2d1svg-dev
    librust-winapi+d2d1-1-dev
    librust-winapi+d2d1-2-dev
    librust-winapi+d2d1-3-dev
    librust-winapi+d2d1-dev
    librust-winapi+d2dbasetypes-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d9caps-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d9types-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d9-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d10effect-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d10misc-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d10sdklayers-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d10shader-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d10-1shader-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d10-1-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d10-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d11on12-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d11sdklayers-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d11shader-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d11tokenizedprogramformat-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d11-1-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d11-2-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d11-3-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d11-4-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d11-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d12sdklayers-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d12shader-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d12-dev
    librust-winapi+d3dcommon-dev
    librust-winapi+d3dcompiler-dev
    librust-winapi+d3dcsx-dev
    librust-winapi+d3dkmdt-dev
    librust-winapi+d3dkmthk-dev
    librust-winapi+d3dukmdt-dev
    librust-winapi+d3dx10core-dev
    librust-winapi+d3dx10math-dev
    librust-winapi+d3dx10mesh-dev
    librust-winapi+d3d-dev
    librust-winapi+datetimeapi-dev
    librust-winapi+davclnt-dev
    librust-winapi+dbghelp-dev
    librust-winapi+dbt-dev
    librust-winapi+dcommon-dev
    librust-winapi+dcompanimation-dev
    librust-winapi+dcomptypes-dev
    librust-winapi+dcomp-dev
    librust-winapi+dde-dev
    librust-winapi+ddrawint-dev
    librust-winapi+ddrawi-dev
    librust-winapi+ddraw-dev
    librust-winapi+debugapi-dev
    librust-winapi+debug-dev
    librust-winapi+default-dev
    librust-winapi+devguid-dev
    librust-winapi+devicetopology-dev
    librust-winapi+devpkey-dev
    

    I haven’t reviewed the relevant policies lately, but I suspect those should have been separate packages, not thousands of entries in a single package’s Provides: field.


  • Ergo saying “it’s aSsAuLt” is missing the point and hysterical, preaching to the choir.

    You’re projecting a lot of tone and intent that doesn’t exist in my comment, nor in my view of the issue, and you’re doing it with a hefty dose of snark. That’s unnecessary, unhelpful, and unkind.

    In future, you might consider multiple ways that other people’s comments could be interpreted, rather than leaping to assumptions that give you an excuse to criticise them and control the conversation.

    Be well. Goodbye.




  • who@feddit.orgtoYou Should Know@lemmy.worlddeGoogle Your Life
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    The need being served here is for an alternative to Google’s spyware, not for an alternative to Android.

    The Android operating system itself is not a significant privacy problem. (It might seem like one because most Android distributions include Google Play Services, but without that, Android is pretty tame and very useful.)