On Sunday, April 8, 2018 1:25:42 PM CDT Simon Frei wrote:
> I totally understand that, I am just trying to get infos to you as
> debian maintainer from my (at the moment admittedly almost non-existing)
> involvement upstream. Exiv2 0.26 will likely not get into testing.
> Upstream does backport a
I totally understand that, I am just trying to get infos to you as
debian maintainer from my (at the moment admittedly almost non-existing)
involvement upstream. Exiv2 0.26 will likely not get into testing.
Upstream does backport a lot of security fixes to 0.26, but negated
creating a dot release
Can we talk ?
___
pkg-kde-extras mailing list
pkg-kde-extras@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-extras
Digikam still works with exiv2 0.25. It's just that a lot of fixes have
gone into 0.26 that prevent crashs in digikam, that's why its cmake file
has a >=0.26 dependency.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
pkg-kde-extras mailing
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 893515 + pending
Bug #893515 [src:digikam] digikam: FTBFS with kdepim 17.12.2
Added tag(s) pending.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
893515:
On Monday, March 19, 2018 10:48:38 AM CDT you wrote:
> digikam 5.6.0-4 can't be compiled with KDE Pim 17.12.2, it failes
> because kcalcore was been refactored to use QDateTime instead of
> KDateTime.
I have DigiKam 5.9.0 compiled locally and it works. Unfortunately, it depends
on exiv2 0.26
