On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 02:11:42AM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:

> after rebuilding thuban in a clean sid chroot (and confirming this with 
> pbuilder) I can say that a simple binNMU fixes this bug.

> As we are in a permanent BSP (where 0-day NMUs are allowed (*)) and this bug 
> is open for more than a week, I plan to do a (sponsored) binNMU tomorrow.

> If you're preparing a new upload within few _days_ anyway, please let me 
> know, 
> so I dont have to bother someone with sponsoring. (As there is no new 
> upstream version, no activity in the BTS or the pkg-grass-devel list (in may) 
> about thuban I somewhat doubt this - but of course I would be happy to be 
> proven wrong :-)

It is not appropriate to use binNMUs to work around insufficiently versioned
dependencies.  What happens when python-wxgtk2.4 version 2.4.6 is uploaded
just before the freeze, breaking thuban again without anyone noticing in

This is a sourceful bug between thuban and python-wxgtk2.4 which requires a
sourceful fix.  If thuban isn't actually compatible with all versions of
python-wxgtk2.4 (why not?), then it's wrong for this package to declare its
dependency on python-wxgtk2.4.

Also, FWIW, binNMUs are properly the domain of the porters, and don't fall
under the policy for source NMUs.

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                                   http://www.debian.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Pkg-grass-devel mailing list

Reply via email to