[rene@debian.org: Re: Latest OOo Etch update -7etch1 depends on different libneon]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
*sigh*. too late...
Typoed the email address. Forward...
- ----- Forwarded message from Rene Engelhard <rene@debian.org> -----
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 01:43:30 +0200
From: Rene Engelhard <rene@debian.org>
To: "Kevin B. McCarty" <kmccarty@Princeton.EDU>
Cc: debian-security@debian.org
Subject: Re: Latest OOo Etch update -7etch1 depends on different libneon
Organization: The Debian Project
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
Hi,
Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
> I noticed that the latest OpenOffice.org security update in Etch
> (version 2.0.4.dfsg.2-7etch1, which fixed DSA 1307) depends on libneon25
> whereas the previous Etch version (2.0.4.dfsg.2-5etch1) depended instead
> on libneon26. Are changes in the depended package names, which require
> a dist-upgrade, in security updates considered a bug? If so, should I
No. Because the change to libneon25 would have been done anywa in etch
r1. See -5etch2 in proposed-updates.
If you compare to the version which is already approved and accepted for
etch1, there's no dependency change..
Actually, -7 was planned to be in etch r1 but as aj doesn't copy it over
rom testing..
> bother filing it?
No. Normal.
Gr??e/Regards,
Ren?
- --
.''`. Ren? Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer
: :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/
`. `' rene@debian.org | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73
`- Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB 7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73
- ----- End forwarded message -----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFGbzGu+FmQsCSK63MRAu31AJ9xluP2gQQWxSOZBQG17yJVuL3o3QCfUzcs
rW/wtcjyG6MyPmeHNNZ1Vmw=
=oPX8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: