On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 07:18:17PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote: > I recall that it was announced that libxaw8 should be dropped, but I > can only find discussions on the X list and > http://lists.debian.org/debian-x/2006/01/msg00409.html.
> Packages are starting to FTBFS because libxaw8 has not yet been adapted > to the new Xorg directories (http://bugs.debian.org/365597), and there > are two possible ways to fix this: Either fix libxaw8-dev, or > alternatively prevent libxaw8-dev from being used. > My question is now whether to switch away from libxaw8 is a wishlist > issue or in fact a fixed plan? What's the appropriate severity for > "drop libxaw8" bugs, and what should maintainers do? libxaw8 is abandoned upstream and there are no plans to fix it for the Xorg7 transition. This is a >= serious bug for any package still build-depending on libxaw8-dev, as they FTBFS and this isn't going to be fixed on the xaw8 side. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
