On Tue, 9 Dec 2008 18:12:56 +0000 (UTC) Andy Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Can someone confirm / deny my understanding here? As I say, I'm > >> very new to all this. > > > > Sorry to inflict my mistake upon you. It happens to everyone at some > > point. > > Whoops. It appears the mistake is mine. Picture support was actually > added in flac 1.1.3, not 1.2.0 as I thought. In which case, the bug would only show if the package was in unstable and then installed on Etch as that has 1.1.2. That would be a problem for a package in Debian as it would risk a failure during a migration from Etch to Lenny but your package has no real chance of getting into Lenny. > Mea culpa. (join the club) > My .deb however doesn't depend on a specific version of libflac, is > that because there are no versions prior to this available? It's because of the bug in flac and because you haven't used the workaround. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/ http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/
pgp7bRVEtIHj4.pgp
Description: PGP signature
