Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> close 360606 1.17-22
> thanks
>
> Ian Jackson writes ("psnup showpage fix mistakenly not included?"):
>> I'm sorry, I didn't to pay proper attention to the bug status. I now
>> see that the bug report was closed, by a changelog entry in 1.17-22.
>> However, the source code change to psspec.c was not included.
>
> And I was wrong about that too. I was misled by the hideous patch
> system the package is using. Sorry for bombarding you with useless
> mails.
>
> Do you think a patch system like this is really necessary for
> psutils ?
Hello. I just got back into town after a week away and am technically
still "on vacation" according to the debian LDAP. In any case, thanks
for testing the psnup showpage patch. I will include it in my next
upload.
psutils is not really active upstream, though I've corresponded with
the upstream author. If I send him all the patches from debian, he
may consider releasing a 1.18 so that we could be pretty clean against
upstream. He's working on 2.0 but has been stalled for a long time
and may never finish. Some of the patches are not that great in our
system anyway and I wanted to spend a few hours cleaning them up.
As for the patch system, I wanted to use a patch system to make it a
bit easier for me to manage which changes are which so that I could
send a more useful report to the upstream author when the time comes.
I prefer the tarball-in-a-tarball with patch system style of package
maintenance because it is easier for me to manage new upstream
releases that way and it's also easier for me to manually manage for
my own use creating both an RPM and a debian package with my local
changes. I inherited psutils from another maintainer though so I
couldn't do that since there hasn't been a new upstream version and I
don't want to use an epoch or play games with the .orig.tar.gz.
As for whether the debian psutils package is maintained at the moment,
a quick glance at the PTS and status of the bug reports should show
that it is being half-heartedly maintained (but no offense taken at
the question!). :-) I took over the package in October with the
intention of cleaning it up. I've closed many bugs on the package
since then and done some other cleanup, but events in my life have
prevented me from spending as much time as I would like to. It is in
worse shape than any of my other packages. I am strongly considering
offering it up since I don't really think I can maintain it actively
with my present time. If no one takes it, I'll continue to chip away
at it bit by bit. Many of the open bugs are either related to some
interaction issues between xprint and psutils or people's various
suggestions about including other utilities, some of which may have
licensing terms that are different. Anyway, for a skilled programmer
with PostScript knowledge (which I am), it shouldn't take more than a
few days of concentrated work to really whip this into shape, but I
haven't had the time or inclination. I am, however, taking care of
new bugs and gradually knocking out as many of the old ones as
possible.
I will happily accept any patches from Ubuntu. I run dapper on my
laptop anyway, and have habitually paid attention to any Ubunutu bugs
against my packages. It's both a matter of pride and principle for me
to have my debian packages in Ubuntu without modification if at all
possible.
Thanks!
--
Jay Berkenbilt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
