Bug#360055: libxft2 must be downgraded to stable's 2.1.7.1-1 for testing to be usable

2006-03-31 Thread Olivier Berger
Le jeudi 30 mars 2006 à 21:19 -0800, Steve Langasek a écrit : > On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 01:56:47PM +0200, Olivier Berger wrote: > > I understand that, and expected this kind of answer, hoping that I could > > get clarification. > > You could have gotten clarification just by following up to the bu

Bug#360055: libxft2 must be downgraded to stable's 2.1.7.1-1 for testing to be usable

2006-03-30 Thread Steve Langasek
On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 01:56:47PM +0200, Olivier Berger wrote: > I understand that, and expected this kind of answer, hoping that I could > get clarification. You could have gotten clarification just by following up to the bug you knew was already open... > > > so that testing becomes useable wi

Bug#360055: libxft2 must be downgraded to stable's 2.1.7.1-1 for testing to be usable

2006-03-30 Thread Daniel Stone
On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 12:14:40PM +0200, Olivier Berger wrote: > Is someone taking this one seriously ? No. signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Bug#360055: libxft2 must be downgraded to stable's 2.1.7.1-1 for testing to be usable

2006-03-30 Thread Olivier Berger
Le jeudi 30 mars 2006 à 03:05 -0800, Steve Langasek a écrit : > On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 12:14:40PM +0200, Olivier Berger wrote: > > Package: libxft2 > > Version: 2.1.7-1 > > Severity: grave > > Justification: renders package unusable > > > (More details on issues in #350113) > > Don't open new bu

Bug#360055: libxft2 must be downgraded to stable's 2.1.7.1-1 for testing to be usable

2006-03-30 Thread Olivier Berger
Package: libxft2 Version: 2.1.7-1 Severity: grave Justification: renders package unusable When will the issue with libxft2 be considered seriously so that testing becomes useable without downgrading libxft*.dev to stable's versions ? (More details on issues in #350113) It has been around in tes