On Sun, Sep 25, 2005 at 01:19:57AM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 24, 2005 at 03:17:20PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> >> One or more of these packages still depends on the removed gimp-print > >> package, and is not ready to be updated in testing. > > printconf still depends on gimp-print. > That one looks OK (foomatic-db-gutenprint | foomatic-db-gimp-print, > and there are transitional packages in any case). The culprit is > likely gs-esp, which still depends on libgimpprint1. I hope that > doesn't migrate just yet though--current the gs-* in unstable are a > disaster. > I could rebuild a new libgimpprint1 from the old gimp-print source and > put it in oldlibs. This should break that cycle. Would that be > worthwhile? I wouldn't add it back just for the purposes of getting gutenprint into testing; I don't think it'll hurt us any to take our time with the gutenprint transition. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
