Justin Pryzby wrote: > Unfortunately my first round didn't use the script (though I was aware > of it), and so many packages say "(no replacement needed)", even > though they have a direct build-dep on some package which used to be > depended on by xlibs-dev. So I'm going back through the bugs and > adding the dependencies from the xlibs-split-check script and > including interdiffs.
Thanks, your work is very appreciated indeed. > The following bugs had no needed build-dep replacement (according to > the checker script) and have nmu diffs attached: > > 346622 346626 346646 346773 346827 346624 346634 346760 346795 > 347096 > > Note that some of the maintainers have already responded, so you > should take a quick look at the bug log before building. Sure, I am über-careful in this regard. I want the NMUs to be friendly, non-intrussive and don't want to waste my time or the Maintainer's time. > Junichi (dancer) had a good idea to debdiff the resulting .deb, which > is something I didn't do (but would in the future). I am not sure this helps me build, test, and upload an sponsored NMU. Is there a link you can provide to a more detailed explanation of this procedure? Thnaks! -- .''`. sleep: command not found : :' : `. `' Proudly running unstable Debian GNU/Linux `- www.amayita.com www.malapecora.com www.chicasduras.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
