On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 09:32:57PM +0200, أحمد المحمودي wrote:
> 1) bidiv: the source package in Fedora was patched to be able to compile
> with fribidi 0.19.1
>
> 2) centerim: fribidi was not enabled in Fedora source package. Hence no
> problem appeared.
>
> 3) mailutils: this package does not
I have a correction and additional info regarding the matter:
The correction, regarding what I mentioned earlier:
> * quesoglc uses: nFriBidiMirroredChars, fribidi_prop_to_type
> [...]
> quesoglc-0.7.2/src/fribidi/fribidi.c:pp->pos, pp->len,
> fribidi_type_name (pp->type), pp->level);
>
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 04:40:02PM -, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> I'm sure that Behdad would be interested in that list. A soname change
> would make the switch to the new version of fribidi a lot easier and
> less messy.
---end quoted text---
The fribidi mailing list was CC'ed in the last email.
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 11:18:56AM -, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> Check the list of rdepends, get the source and grep -r for the function
> names that were removed between versions.
---end quoted text---
For all packages in Debian unstable (sid) that depend on libfribidi0, I
grep'ed for the symbo
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 08:31:04AM -, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> Are the missing symbols anything that's used in the distro? Is it
> functions that were supposed to be exposed at all?
---end quoted text---
Many were symbols that weren't supposed to be exposed in the first place
indeed. How can I
On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 10:19:14AM -, Daniel Holbach wrote:
> Salam Ahmed... do you think it wuold make sense to get this into Ubuntu
> first as the mentoring request in Debian seems to be getting quite old?
---end quoted text---
There is only one issue which is removed symbols discussed on bo
