On 25/04/2022 14:55, Paul Gevers wrote:
Hi Andreas,
On 07-04-2022 09:21, Andreas Tille wrote:
Sorry, that's my fault. I'm preparing an upload to fix #1007984
targeting new.
Looking at https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/netpbm-free_2:10.98.00-1.html, is there
any reason why you didn't add "Provides:
libnetpbm9-dev, libnetpbm10-dev"?
If that would work, it would prevent updates in at least 7 source packages:
https://qa.debian.org/dose/debcheck/src_testing_main/1650862802/amd64.html If
it wouldn't work, it seems to me that an unversioned -dev package doesn't bring
us much.
Paul
(I was about to ping ftp master to accept your package, but in the current
state it wouldn't solve the problem)
The version with the unversioned libnetpbm-dev was rejected.
(due to reasons unrelated to the package rename)
https://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-phototools-devel/2022-May/014623.html
