[Secure-testing-team] Another syntax addition: <removed>

[Florian Weimer]

* Moritz Muehlenhoff:

> The fix is to remove the package permanantly from the archive, as
> it's broken anyway. This is a "fix", as etch will not be affected,
> but not a complete fix for those who still have bidwatcher
> installed. So this marks a package as addressed, only not with a
> patch, but with a big hammer.

But you can infer this information from the Sources files (and use the
removed-packages file for double-checking).  I don't think it's a good
idea to duplicate this data.

> Plus, <removed> allows tsck to generate warnings for those, who
> still have the package installed (the respective dselect section is
> rather unknown to most users).

Marking the package as unfixed does the same thing, doesn't it?