On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 02:00:26PM +0200, Torquil Macdonald Sørensen wrote: > No, but I do now. Fixed! Should geda-gschem depend on it, or should I just > close this bug? Or perhaps recommend/suggest? > > Actually, it also fixed the gwave and xoscope entries... ---end quoted text---
Actually it is recommended by 'geda', 'gwave' packages. Maybe I should actually move it to recommends of 'geda-gschem' & 'geda-gattrib' packages. -- أحمد المحمودي (Ahmed El-Mahmoudy) Digital design engineer GPG KeyID: 0xEDDDA1B7 GPG Fingerprint: 8206 A196 2084 7E6D 0DF8 B176 BC19 6A94 EDDD A1B7
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
