* Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040606 03:55]: > Digging into these now. BTW, it would be helpful if you would include > bug numbers with your requests, as this is ultimately what I base my > decision on (since at a minimum I have to check that the bugs still > apply), and what I've been using as the comment on the hints.
Ok, will do this in future. > > # undistributable code in non-free, maintainer doesn't take action > > remove 3270/3.2.17-2 > > remove abc2mtex/1.6.1-5 > At only 22 days, these are currently below my threshold. What is your current threshold? > > # FTBFS, first reported on 2002-11-20, no success in fixing till now > > remove xemacs21-packages/2003.01.27-1.1 > Hint added, but this also seems to require removal of xemacs21 itself. > Thoughts? Strange. grep-dctrl -Fdepends,recommends xemacs21-packages < /org/ftp.root/debian/dists/sarge/main/binary-i386/Packages gives me no output at all. Do I make some silly mistake? > > # ignore 232715 - master.cf modified by maintainer scripts and a conffile > > # reason: updates from woody to sarge work. > > I would prefer that if the package is going to specially handle the > config file, the maintainer use a tool such as ucf instead of touching a > conffile. As such, I'm not going to tag this myself, even though the > impact appears to be minimal. I fully agree with you about the way I'd like a package handles this. However, due to the minimal impact of the bug and the de-facto importance of postfix, I didn't make a removal suggestion on postfix (even as there is a second RC-bug that's definitly not sarge-ignore). > > # wrong shell code, patch sitting since Mar 14 there, in non-free > > remove maelstrom/1.4.3-L3.0.5-3 > Given that I find 210 usages of test test1 -a test2 in 175 postinsts on > my local system, and only four of those postinst scripts declare > /bin/bash as an interpreter, I would like to see a POSIX citation for > this bug before we endure the joy of that particular mass-bugfiling. > > Comment sent to the bug submitter. I'm inclined to tag this as > sarge-ignore regardless of the outcome, given the number of affected > packages and the minimal concrete impact. Ah, also ok. Thanks for using these suggestions. Cheers, Andi -- http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/ PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C
