Re: NMU of libdb4.0 for prio:standard
On Mon, Apr 14, 2003 at 01:34:39PM -0500, Drew Scott Daniels wrote:
> Is it time for an NMU on this bug, is
> http://qa.debian.org/debcheck.php?dist=unstable&package=perl wrong, or is
> there a bug with libperl5.8, perl-base, perl-modules, perl-doc, perl-suid,
> libperl-dev, and/or libcgi-fast-perl (all aka src:perl?)?
> I don't mean to imply a false dichotomy, but I think an NMU may be called
> for as this bug is more than four months old and it's an RC bug.
All these priority mismatch bugs are a waste of time, IMHO. The
ftpmasters have to modify the override file anyway in order for anything
to happen, and it's perfectly possible for them to do so in the absence
of any change to the package (so NMUs for such bugs are not only
overkill but useless). Furthermore, in the absence of filed RC bugs
priority mismatches do not affect migration into testing, regardless of
what debcheck.php may say, so the entire premise of the bug was wrong.
In any case, if you look closely, you'll find that libdb4.0 was always
Priority: standard in its debian/control file, so this must have been
due to overrides in the first place, which now say that libdb4.0 is
$ apt-cache show libdb4.0
Maintainer: Matthew Wilcox <firstname.lastname@example.org>
So this bug should just be closed.
Colin Watson [email@example.com]