Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> and concluded that the only problem would be that some buildds might >> have libkpathsea3's dev package already installed. > > Oh, sorry; the fact that the libkpathsea3 source package still includes > libkpathsea-dev confused madison (and me) into thinking this was still the > old libkpathsea-dev.
The libkpathsea-dev package from the libkpathsea3 source package *is* the old libkpathsea-dev - but I think you know that and I only don't understand what you wanted to say. > (This is an RC bug on libkpathsea3, btw, since that > package can no longer be uploaded in its present state...) A RC which hopefully can be resolved soon by removing the package. Do you think I need to file it? >> > If you remove libkpathsea-dev from the libkpathsea3 package (or drop >> > libkpathsea3 altogether from unstable), then it should be possible to >> > binNMU >> > these > >> Dropping completely would be a task for the ftpmaster, correct? > > Yes, upon request of the package maintainer. Hm, but you agree that it is not necessary to remove the libkpathsea-dev binary package from sid (or sid and etch); we can instead wait until we can remove the complete libkpathsea3 stuff, right? > Anyway, I've scheduled binNMUs for the source packages cjk-latex, dvi2dvi, > dvipng, evince, lcdf-typetools, texfam, tkdvi, and tmview, which are the > packages I found which still depend on libkpathsea3 in current unstable > versions of the packages. Many thank, fine. I'll keep an eye on them. Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich Debian Developer (teTeX)
