On Mon, Apr 14, 2003 at 01:34:39PM -0500, Drew Scott Daniels wrote: > Is it time for an NMU on this bug, is > http://qa.debian.org/debcheck.php?dist=unstable&package=perl wrong, or is > there a bug with libperl5.8, perl-base, perl-modules, perl-doc, perl-suid, > libperl-dev, and/or libcgi-fast-perl (all aka src:perl?)? > > I don't mean to imply a false dichotomy, but I think an NMU may be called > for as this bug is more than four months old and it's an RC bug.
All these priority mismatch bugs are a waste of time, IMHO. The ftpmasters have to modify the override file anyway in order for anything to happen, and it's perfectly possible for them to do so in the absence of any change to the package (so NMUs for such bugs are not only overkill but useless). Furthermore, in the absence of filed RC bugs priority mismatches do not affect migration into testing, regardless of what debcheck.php may say, so the entire premise of the bug was wrong. In any case, if you look closely, you'll find that libdb4.0 was always Priority: standard in its debian/control file, so this must have been due to overrides in the first place, which now say that libdb4.0 is Priority: standard: $ apt-cache show libdb4.0 Package: libdb4.0 Priority: standard Section: libs Installed-Size: 620 Maintainer: Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Architecture: i386 Source: db4.0 Version: 4.0.14-1.2 So this bug should just be closed. Cheers, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
