On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 03:29:44PM +0000, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote: > On 1 February 2010 07:42, Mike Hommey <m...@glandium.org> wrote: > > > > Nope, all the terms don't match: %s/libxul.so doesn't, and it's my > > fault (a change in xulrunner 1.9.1.6-1). > > > > Well I'm not an expert =) just tried my best in triaging this. > > > I'll add a check in xulrunner build to make sure dh_xulrunner still > > works with new versions. > > > > Ok thanks =) and I'll do bmu for xiphos after that.
I'll check if other packages have been built against xulrunner 1.9.1.6 and if they lost a dependency as a consequence. I'll probably file binnmu requests after that. > > Thanks for spotting the problem. > > > > Your welcome > > > Mike > > > > PS: Note that before using dh_xulrunner, xiphos didn't have a xulrunner > > dependency, iirc, and therefore, wasn't working properly either ;) > > > > /me is pretending it was nothing to do with me.... how many RC bugs > was it again? =))))) Only 4 ;) Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
