On Jun 24, Sune Vuorela (nos...@vuorela.dk) wrote: > On 2009-06-24, Neil Roeth <n...@debian.org> wrote: > > I received the below email that my package, aplus-fsf, was removed from > > testing. Apparently that is due to the removal of gtk 1.2, but aplus-fsf > > has > > no direct dependency on gtk 1.2. I'm a little surprised at the removal - > > no > > bugs were filed, no lintian error that the package depended on an obsolete > > package, etc. Anyway... why exactly it was removed and what needs to > > happen > > to get it back into testing? Below the email are the relevant lines from > > http://release.debian.org/britney/hints/neilm. > > > > > # gtk 1.2 removal, 20090527 > > > # Round 3: > > > > # Round 3: > > remove xemacs21/21.4.22-1 gtk+1.2/1.2.10-18.1 toolbar-fancy/0.07-7.1 > > aplus-fsf/4.22.1-1 > > A wild guess would be aplus-fsf-el built from aplus-fsf source package > depending on xemacs21-nomule, built from xemacs21 source package. > > I do agree that you should have been adviced beforehand. > > >From a quick view, it looks like either dropping the -el package or > somehow depending on some other emacs flavour will let aplus-fsf flow > back into testing once a new version is 10 days old. > > /Sune
Thanks. So, another alternative would be for xemacs to remove its dependence on gtk 1.2, correct? I'll explore that angle as well. -- Neil Roeth -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
