Christian Marillat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Johannes Rohr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> [...]
>
>> control-center would break xscreensaver in sarge. And xscreensaver has
>> 3 grave bugs, #171772, #180063, #195740.
>
> Very funny that excuses pages doesn't display that.
>
>> At least #180063 is a real security hole that probably takes a fair
>> amount of hacking to get fixed.
>
> Then I'll remove the xscreensaver-gnome suggests. I don't see a good
> reason to keep that.
That won't really make a difference, since control-center 2.2.x
*breaks* the version of xscreensaver-gnome in sarge.
Package: xscreensaver-gnome
Priority: optional
Section: x11
Installed-Size: 300
Maintainer: Karl Ramm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Architecture: i386
Source: xscreensaver
Version: 4.05-9
Replaces: xscreensaver (<< 3.33-4)
Depends: [...], libcapplet0 (>= 1:1.4.0.1-6)[...]
^^^^^^^^^^^
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ apt-cache show libcapplet0
Package: libcapplet0
Priority: optional
Section: libs
Installed-Size: 84
Maintainer: Christian Marillat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Architecture: i386
Source: control-center
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Version: 1:1.4.0.5-3
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
control-center 2.2.x is blocked because it does not provide libcapplet0
> Another advice ?
[...]
Well, if the RC bugs in xscreensaver apply to 4.0.5 and 4.0.10
equally, which I suspect, than couldn't those bugs be tagged
"sarge,sid"? Would this tell the testing scripts to pass through the
newer version as both of them are equally buggy?
Thanks,
Johannes
