On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 08:03:38PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > reopen 451222 > thanks > > I was having a really good day until I got this:
Good for you! > > > As part of the long term mass bug filing for cross building support, > > > (http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2007/11/msg00116.html), I've > > > prepared this patch for debian/rules. > > > > As I said before your patch is wrong and I am not inclined to argue > > the point anymore, so I am closing this bug. > > What is the point of closing a bug without a fix? The package will not > cross-build and the change makes no difference to the Debian package. This never was a bug: your report does not state any packaging requirement that this package fails to meet, only one you made up. So it is a wishlist item, accompanied by a broken patch. Furthermore, this issue will be fixed with a new sourceful upload, which is the only sane way to fix the build system. This is delayed in the hope of a new upstream version in July. > > There is no need to > > NMU libjpeg to include this broken patch. > The patch is not wrong - it works just fine and it is completely > insulated from the Debian builds. You mean the patch you sent *today* ? How was I supposed to apply it before? Anyway I refuse to apply any patch which cause the upstream libtool to be used in any way. > rpath is not an issue for Emdebian - I don't care what happens with it, > it simply doesn't matter within the context of Emdebian installations. But I do, because this is a policy requirement. Cheers, -- Bill. <ballo...@debian.org> Imagine a large red swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
