* Daniel Leidert [Sat, 11 Oct 2008 22:49:52 +0200]:
> > (Any reason why passivetex is still Suggested?)
> Just for Etch users/backports. It will be removed in Lenny+1. IMHO it
> doesn't hurt.
Oh, I'm not saying it hurts, I was just curious. But note that
passivetex is not in etch either... (only
Am Samstag, den 11.10.2008, 19:22 +0200 schrieb Adeodato Simó:
> * Daniel Leidert [Sat, 11 Oct 2008 14:59:37 +0200]:
>
> > Please unblock xmlto:
[..]
> (Any reason why passivetex is still Suggested?)
Just for Etch users/backports. It will be removed in Lenny+1. IMHO it
doesn't hurt.
Regards, Dan
* Daniel Leidert [Sat, 11 Oct 2008 14:59:37 +0200]:
> Please unblock xmlto:
> > xmlto (0.0.20-3) unstable; urgency=low
> > * debian/control (Suggests): Added xmltex now providing passivetex
> > (closes: #416622, #440518). Thanks to Robert Wohlrab.
> > (Description): Added information a
Please unblock xmlto:
> xmlto (0.0.20-3) unstable; urgency=low
>
> * debian/control (Suggests): Added xmltex now providing passivetex
> (closes: #416622, #440518). Thanks to Robert Wohlrab.
> (Description): Added information about fop/docbook-xsl as
> alternative to passivetex.
>
4 matches
Mail list logo
