On 2020-11-06 Hugh McMaster wrote:
[...]
> Sorry for the long delay. Real life got in the way.
Hello Hugh,
no worries.
> I’ve adapted your patch and made some other changes.
[...]
Thanks for doublechecking, uploaded.
cu Andreas
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On 2020-10-15 Hugh McMaster wrote:
[...]
> I spoke with the Debian QA Team and they were reluctant to remove gtkam
> because of popcon numbers.
> Myon said I should file a Serious bug against the package (#972085).
> Options for libexif-gtk seem to be reverting to GTK2 only, or building GTK2
>
On 2020-10-04 Hugh McMaster wrote:
[...]
> We can't remove libexif-gtk, as libexif-gtk-dev is a r-b-dep of mlt.
I missed that one.
> Interestingly, mlt doesn't use GTK2, just the libexif functionality.
[...]
Afaict it is an unused b-d, bug filed.
cu Andreas
On 2020-10-01 Hugh McMaster wrote:
[...]
> I've uploaded a new version of libexif-gtk to Debian Mentors, fixing
> the issues discussed in this thread.
> Thanks for your help with this.
Good morning Hugh,
I think this looks alright now.
I thought I should try it out and there is a only single
Hi Andreas,
On Thu, 1 Oct 2020 at 02:49, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> Runtime library are generally installed as a dependency, when the
> depending package is rebuilt against the newer library apt will pull it
> in and the old library can be autoremoved.
Very nice.
> > I’m also targeting
On 2020-09-30 Hugh McMaster wrote:
> Hi Andreas,
> On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 22:03, Andreas Metzler wrote:
[...]
> > The transitional package makes no sense, it actually causes breakage.
> > Packages depend on libexif-gtk5 because they need a library with
> > soname libexif-gtk.so.5. The dummy
On 2020-09-27 Hugh McMaster wrote:
[...]
> I am looking for a sponsor to upload the package "libexif-gtk" to NEW,
> as switching to GTK 3 caused the main package to be renamed.
> * Package name: libexif-gtk
[...]
> The source builds the following binary packages:
> libexif-gtk-dev -
7 matches
Mail list logo
