On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 11:44:45PM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote: > Are *-anthy packages uploaded to cope with this new anthy just like > ibus-anthy? > fcitx-anthy > hime-anthy > scim-anthy > uim-anthy
They are rebuild with new anthy (libanthy1). https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-anthy.html - https://packages.debian.org/unstable/fcitx-anthy (0.2.3-1) - https://packages.debian.org/unstable/gcin-anthy (2.8.5+dfsg1-4+b1) - https://packages.debian.org/unstable/hime-anthy (0.9.10+git20170427+dfsg1-2+b1) - https://packages.debian.org/unstable/ibus-anthy (1.5.9-2.1) - https://packages.debian.org/unstable/scim-anthy (1.2.7-6+b2) - https://packages.debian.org/unstable/uim-plugins (1:1.8.6+gh20161003.0.d63dadd-8) > Otherwise, they are broken in unstable now. (I did not have time to test > them yet) At least, I tested uim-anthy a little, it looks well. > Even these are updated with manual patches, all these updated package > needs to move together from unstable to testing. I am not very familiar > with this ABI breaking library update. We may need to add BREAKS: to > anthy to ensure this. (I am not sure) That may reqire to upload -7 for > anthy. I am not familiar and not sure, too. -- Regards, dai GPG Fingerprint = 0B29 D88E 42E6 B765 B8D8 EA50 7839 619D D439 668E
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature