Adrian Bunk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sending a patch for #354508 would be silly since all it takes is adding > one letter to debian/control, and I can't believe that you think the > maintainer of the package would be dumb enough for not seeing this from > the bug report.
- You could explain this to the maintainer, or - you could actually show him that it is true, or - you could identify more packages and file more bugs, or - you could start collecting information about packages that need to be NMUed because the maintainer don't react. > The advantage of the libkpathsea4-dev -> libkpathsea-dev is that the > packages build depending on libkpathsea-dev will automatically move to > libkpathsea4. Only *if* they are rebuilt. I have not checked it (If you'd do this it would help us more than this discussion), but from my experience with other bug reports related to the teTeX-2.0.2->3.0 transition, at least 50% of the affected packages are basically unmaintained. > I'd also have thought that implemting my porposal was trivial enough > that it's not worth sending a patch, but in case you need one it is > below. You forgot the promise. Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich Debian Developer (teTeX)
