Package: cups-pdf Version: 1.7.3-6 Followup-For: Bug #331378
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) never mind, folks. I RTFReadme file. Out of curiosity, would it be too absurd to suggest a change in how certain changes are reported for packages?? This might involve an email to root about specific usability changes such as this. While seemingly trivial to maintainers, etc., it strikes me as nutty to assume that people would automatically check the README files for all of the packages they install. It took me a while to simply prove to myself where the problem was for this. An email about path changes would have saved a lot of my time. Other kinds of changes don't hit so hard. This one has a direct impact on perceived results. Can developers recognize these differences and somehow include email notification? Thanks for listening. It's late here. Sorry 'bout the ranting, but my head hurts. -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.11.5 Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US (charmap=ISO-8859-1) Versions of packages cups-pdf depends on: ii adduser 3.67.2 Add and remove users and groups ii cupsys 1.1.23-12 Common UNIX Printing System(tm) - ii gs-esp 8+8.15rc4.dfsg.1-2.1 The Ghostscript PostScript interpr ii libc6 2.3.5-6 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an cups-pdf recommends no packages. -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
