Dear friends at the release team,
I am planning to upload seti-applet to stable, in order to fix these two
bugs:
seti-applet (0.2.2-2) stable; urgency=high
* Added CFLAGS to find libgtop header files (Closes: #140659)
Added CONFIG_FLAGS for completeness.
* Fixed installation (Closes: #168930)
* Delete symlink on clean target, so that subsequent builds
don't fail.
Before that happens, I want to make the reporters test that the bug is
really closed. This package was already broken when I took it and never
uploaded to stable because I though a new upstream release would make it
into testing.
It didn't because of some usatisfied dependencies in archs other than
i386: Suggests on setiathome which cannot be satisfied on m68k, arm,
s390 and mips. I realised when I found out about
http://qa.debian.org/developer.php and woody was already released. I
believed #140659 issue was closed. But I think it is time now to fix it
for good.
Also, I want to ask for advice on wether I should completely remove the
Suggests field (and be in main instead of contrib) or tag it i386
specific, as it can't be built in many archs:
http://qa.debian.org/debcheck.php?dist=testing&package=seti-applet
http://qa.debian.org/debcheck.php?dist=unstable&package=seti-applet
The idea of asking for removal sounds not that bad either, as it was
supposed to be beta and has remained so for so long (see #140656 and
#76167). The Makefiles are hell, the code has been dead for a long time,
and I don't even know if it will work agains new Gnome 2.0 panel
(haven't had time to test).
Please let me know what you think of this complete mess.
--
.''`. Nothing screams poor workmanship more than wrinkles in the duct tape
: :' :
`. `' Proudly running Debian GNU/Linux Sid (2.4.18 + Ext3)
`- www.amayita.com www.malapecora.com www.chicasduras.com
Listening to Mala Rodriguez - Tambalea
