> Alad Wenter via arch-dev-public <firstname.lastname@example.org> hat am 14.
> Februar 2018 um 12:26 geschrieben:
> > Baptiste Jonglez <bapti...@bitsofnetworks.org> hat am 14. Februar 2018 um
> > 10:19 geschrieben:
> > Quite frankly, the packaging issue itself is minor, I was just surprised
> > of the way it was handled: spending time to close several bug reports
> > about the issue and telling people that they are stupid , instead of just
> > fixing the issue in the first place. It goes against (my idea of) common
> > sense.
> I was initially surprised by the force of the reaction you linked, but then
> saw this was a response to the *eleventh* request. That makes it a natural
> response to people being relentlessly obnoxious.
> About the package itself, I agree that if libxfont2 were an *actual*
> replacement of libxfont, then the corresponding field should be filled in.
> According to upstream , the API/ABI is however entirely different, with
> according .so names. As such, you'd make use of packages the rely on the old
> API impossible solely for a short-term convenience.
And I forgot the link again: