Gerfried Fuchs writes: >>>> http://packages.debian.org/unstable/mail/kmail >> >>> I'm not sure whether this bug is valid or not, but it's surely not >>> a kdenetwork bug. >> >> notice that the "KDE network module" text on that page is grabbed >> from kmail package description.
> And? What has the package description to do at all with this bug? > It has no influence at all, its the Source: control field that > counts. He was under the impression that the description in the new package was outdated, which was not the case. > * Dominique Devriese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > [2004-03-10 18:10]: >> Riku Voipio writes: >>>>> On packages.debian.org, kmail' sources are incorrectly reported >>>>> as "kdenetwork" (should be kdepim). >> >> Yes, and this description has been properly updated to kdepim in >> unstable. > Ah. When? While browsing packages.qa.d.o for kdenetwork and kdepim > it seems to have moved in january. Quite some time.... > Aaah! I see the problem! > Versions: 4:3.2.1-1 [i386, powerpc], 4:3.1.5-1 [alpha, arm, hppa, > ia64, m68k, mips, mipsel, s390, sparc] > 3.2.1 in fact doesn't have kmail in kdenetwork, 3.1.5 *does* have > kmail in kdenetwork. Yes, of course, maybe I should have said this, but I assumed it was clear from the bug report. > The problem is not easy to solve, I'm afraid. There must have been > some puzzling in the package parsing with respect to having all the > different architectures with their current version number > listed. The source link would always be broken for outdated > packages, but the sensible thing would be to point to the source > package for the latest source (which is done, but for the old source > name, strangely). > Frank, I definitely hope this is enough analysis for you to be able > to find where the real problem lies :) I don't know if you are working on the packages.debian.org page, but I assume *that* is where the problem lies. Me and Riku both work on the KDE packages. >> but again, if there's a bug here, it's not in the kde packages. > Right. Sorry for Riku :) He's young and innocent, or such. As are we all, I guess ;p cheers domi
