On Tue, 24 May 2022 13:57:20 +0100, Jon Turney > On 24/05/2022 11:05, Lemures Lemniscati wrote: > > On Mon, 23 May 2022 19:37:43 +0100, Jon Turney > >> On 23/05/2022 14:09, Lemures Lemniscati wrote: > >>> On Sat, 21 May 2022 21:31:46 +0100, Jon Turney > >>>> [1] https://cygwin.com/packages/reports/deprecated_so.html > >>> > >>> Although libiconv2 is contained in the list above, > >>> I don't think it is deprecated. > >> > >> Haha. I think this is just a bug, and the code which generates that > >> report is getting confused by the test: status of libiconv2. > >> > >> Thanks for pointing that out. I'll look into fixing it when I can. > > > > All right. And yet another small point... > > > > I've uploaded libiconv 1.17-1 tagged with 'test', > > but their statuses are 'stable' in the page of its src package: > > https://www.cygwin.com/packages/summary/libiconv-src.html , > > while the ones of generated libiconv packages are 'test': > > e.g. https://www.cygwin.com/packages/summary/libiconv-devel.html . > > > > I was confused a bit by the situation :). > > Yes, this was the other half of this bug, a regression in cygport where the > test: label wasn't correctly added to srcpkg hints. > > I'll fix this data and add a consistency check to calm.
Thank you for the fixes! Lem
