Florent Rougon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Are you sure that lmodern doesn't need a higher version of tex-common?
>
> I looked at both changelogs and couldn't see why it would. Do you have
> anything specific in mind?
No, sorry: Actually I was
Hi,
Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Are you sure that lmodern doesn't need a higher version of tex-common?
I looked at both changelogs and couldn't see why it would. Do you have
anything specific in mind?
> It also seems strange that the submitter has the stable version of it,
> but t
Hi Florent,
Itai Seggev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I upgraded a whole flotilla of packages today. I didn't mean upgrade an
> TeX packages as I'm waiting on TeXLive to stabalize, but apparently aptitude
> decided to upgrade lmodern (or maybe I was just careless). At any rate, even
> though this
Package: lmodern
Version: 1.010x-3
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
I upgraded a whole flotilla of packages today. I didn't mean upgrade an
TeX packages as I'm waiting on TeXLive to stabalize, but apparently aptitude
decided to upgrade lmodern (or maybe I was just careless).
4 matches
Mail list logo
