Luk Claes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm certainly ready to do a mass bug filing. There surely should be
> documentation on how to transition from gtk1.2 to gtk2.0 by now...
Yes, it says "rewrite the software to use the new APIs."
I've not seen any simple transition, apart from some wide-rang
Russ Allbery wrote:
> Luk Claes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> So, libglib1.2ldbl, libgtk1.2 and maybe libgd2-xpm would qualify to be
>> included?
>>
>> Do you want me to file a bug to include them or is mentioning them over
>> here enough?
>
> Could you explain more why that would be? For the
Russ Allbery wrote:
> Luk Claes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> So, libglib1.2ldbl, libgtk1.2 and maybe libgd2-xpm would qualify to be
>> included?
>
> libgd2-xpm isn't even in oldlibs and there's no hint in the package
> description that it shouldn't be used. Is it really being phased out?
Th
On 16/12/2007, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > So, libglib1.2ldbl, libgtk1.2 and maybe libgd2-xpm would qualify to be
> > included?
>
> libgd2-xpm isn't even in oldlibs and there's no hint in the package
> description that it shouldn't be used. Is it really being phased out?
I am unsure about this, as th
Luk Claes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So, libglib1.2ldbl, libgtk1.2 and maybe libgd2-xpm would qualify to be
> included?
libgd2-xpm isn't even in oldlibs and there's no hint in the package
description that it shouldn't be used. Is it really being phased out?
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED
Luk Claes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So, libglib1.2ldbl, libgtk1.2 and maybe libgd2-xpm would qualify to be
> included?
>
> Do you want me to file a bug to include them or is mentioning them over
> here enough?
Could you explain more why that would be? For the first two, do you think
there ar
Russ Allbery wrote:
> Luk Claes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Russ Allbery wrote:
>
>>> Yes. If there are significant packages that become obsolete and
>>> warrant a lintian warning to aid in a transition, please file a
>>> wishlist bug against lintian and we'll include that check in the next
>>
Luk Claes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Yes. If there are significant packages that become obsolete and
>> warrant a lintian warning to aid in a transition, please file a
>> wishlist bug against lintian and we'll include that check in the next
>> release.
>> debcheck is av
Russ Allbery wrote:
> Kumar Appaiah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> In particular, if some package enters or leaves a black/whitelist,
>> wouldn't a new lintian version be warranted in the current scheme of
>> things?
>
> Yes. If there are significant packages that become obsolete and warrant a
>
Kumar Appaiah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> While observing the lintian sources, I observed that Dep.pm has hard
> coded package names for all the obsolete, essential packages etc. I was
> wondering, why are these lists not generated at runtime? One reason
> could be that I can't trust that the so
Dear QA and Lintian people,
While observing the lintian sources, I observed that Dep.pm has hard
coded package names for all the obsolete, essential packages etc. I
was wondering, why are these lists not generated at runtime? One
reason could be that I can't trust that the source of the data on th
11 matches
Mail list logo