Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009, Dawid Węgliński wrote:
>
>>> People may have upgraded but not have followed the advice in the
>>> news item.
>
>> If they had upgraded, they also probably have it fixed already.
>
> So for everybody it's obvious how to fix it? If you argue like t
> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009, Dawid Węgliński wrote:
>> People may have upgraded but not have followed the advice in the
>> news item.
> If they had upgraded, they also probably have it fixed already.
So for everybody it's obvious how to fix it? If you argue like this,
then you don't need the news
On Tuesday 22 of September 2009 18:24:11 Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > On Tue, 22 Sep 2009, Petteri Räty wrote:
> >>
> >> " >
> > Yes there should be such a restriction to avoid hitting people who
> > have already upgraded.
>
> I don't think that there should be a version restriction. People may
>
> On Tue, 22 Sep 2009, Petteri Räty wrote:
>> " Yes there should be such a restriction to avoid hitting people who
> have already upgraded.
I don't think that there should be a version restriction. People may
have upgraded but not have followed the advice in the news item.
Ulrich
Josh Sled wrote:
>
>
>> Display-If-Installed: media-libs/jpeg
>
> "
Yes there should be such a restriction to avoid hitting people who have
already upgraded.
Regards,
Petteri
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Samuli Suominen writes:
> I've been asked to write a news item for jpeg upgrade by few developers.
> Personally I don't see it's required, it's a default library upgrade,
> but here's my attempt:
[…]
> to libjpeg.so.7. This will break temporarily a lot of packages,
> including environments like Gn
I've been asked to write a news item for jpeg upgrade by few developers.
Personally I don't see it's required, it's a default library upgrade,
but here's my attempt:
Title: Upgrade from media-libs/jpeg 6b to 7
Author: Samuli Suominen
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: 2009-09-22
Revision: 1
News-It
