On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 06:06:41PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > reassign 544546 fop > retitle 544546 should provide libfop-java
Why? There is no real need to for this. Any packages can depend on fop and be done. The reason why it was called fop and not libfop-java was that it is not only a library but also a program. Please rethink your bug report. Cheers, Michael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
