Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > However, if needed, I would volunteer to create the debian-keyring > package for hamm (it would be one of those packages whose source and > binary are almost identical, and having a refresh target in > debian/rules to get the source from ftp.debian.org). The package > could then be taken over by you or Igor at any time.
I'd really prefer to do the package myself, nothing personal. I also seriously doubt you'll get Brian to accept a new package into hamm at this stage of the game; feel free to prove me wrong though. (In any event, this is no longer dpkg relevant, please direct any replies, about debian-keyring, to private mail or another list) > > Again, this was a short term solution thing; I too seemed to > > remember that being the consensus, so I made a note to check the > > archives later and updated the shlibs.default.i386 file; better an > > uptodate obsolete file than an outofdate one. > > If it is a useless file, I think there is no difference, really. Or > it could be even worse, having it up-to-date may give the false > impression that it "has" to be up-to-date or that it is useful at > all, when in fact is going to be removed completely. I think it > would be better not to touch it at all if it is going to be removed. It's done no harm till now, broken as it is, I doubt it'll do any fixed. In any event, let's not argue over the details, if I do another NMU it'll be removed (assuming we did remember correctly). -- James ~Yawn And Walk North~ http://yawn.nocrew.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
