Well, checking for libicu-dev in B-D of source package and libicu<SONAME> in binary packages is quite a simple test...
-- Ondřej Surý <ond...@sury.org> > On 16 Feb 2019, at 14:40, Scott Kitterman <deb...@kitterman.com> wrote: > > My impression is the tests were cursory. If a package didn't FTBFS, it was > presumed to be OK. Fortunately he provided a patch, so it is all better for > postfix now. I just don't know what else might have been missed. > > Scott K > >> On Saturday, February 16, 2019 12:47:34 PM Ondřej Surý wrote: >> The icu maintainer has properly communicated the change in the packaging for >> the packages I maintain and depend on libicu-dev (and filled RC bugs for >> it). >> >> I don’t know what has happened that postfix was missed. >> >> Ondrej >> -- >> Ondřej Surý <ond...@sury.org> >> >>> On 16 Feb 2019, at 10:33, Scott Kitterman <deb...@kitterman.com> wrote: >>> >>> Postfix uses the presence of the icu-config binary to detect if libicu is >>> available and thus if SMTPUTF8 support should be compiled in or not. >>> >>> Unfortunately, the icu package recently dropped this file, so when postfix >>> was binNMU'ed it lost SMTPUTF8 (see #921075). >>> >>> I don't know if any other packages depend on this or not, so heads-up. If >>> you maintain a package the build-depends on libicu-dev, you might want to >>> check if it's broken now. >>> >>> I've asked the icu maintainer to put it back (#922451). >>> >>> Scott K >
