Hello Loïc, > The change in itself is a one-liner, the inclusion of the forgotten > patch system include, but results in two patches being applied (in the > current source package, these simply sit in debian/patches but are > useless). > These patches fix important issues, check #313457 for the same story, > or #308362 and #251155 for the technical issues. #308362 seems > particularly nasty in that it: > - causes crashes > - renders the package unusable > ... on some systems. > > My quantitative understanding of the issue at hand isn't very good, I > can't tell whether 10 or 90% of Debian systems would be affected. Thanks for your mail. In any case, the current uploaded version of the package won't be accepted. The patch for fr.po, no matter how trivial it may be, fixes a minor bug (#251155) and thus does not fit the current policy for updates to stable. The other patch (for #308362) might be acceptable, but there definately needs to be a clearer case for it. For example, I find Rene's assertion in http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2005/06/msg00221.html to be contradicting the criticalness of this bug (appearently only segfaults in specific situations and specific usage). The first point is reason enough to reject the package at hand, and if you or Andrew want to provide a new package with the fix for the second, it needs a clear case to be made as to why this is critical. thanks, Thijs
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part