Re: (Beware helix packages) Re: [CrackMonkey] The right to bare legs
On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 12:29:32AM +1100, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> I believe the infamous "aalib" affair actualy came out of a wishlist
> bugreport submitted to them by a user; the then frozen potato aalib was too
> low a version to meet all the helix dependencies. This meant people like me
> had to pull aalib from unstable before I could install helix. By putting an
> updated aalib into helix, debian potato users could apt-get helix without
> that small hickup. It sounds like Helix made their own package rather than
> grab the one from unstable... probably an un-necisary mistake. Dunno why
> they did that, maybe so all the helix packages had a "helix" version number
> for consistancy?
Yes, this is what happened. It was a mistake on my part, and I rebuilt
our Gimp packages and removed aalib as soon as the issue came up on
The problem was introduced when I didn't know the Debian shlibs setup
well enough to override a false version dependency I picked up from
the Woody aalib.
It was fixed in our archive at the beginning of this discussion, and
Joey has now uploaded a version to Woody that overrides the Helix one.
I am sorry that Woody had to be affected (the revision of aalib is now
-w30) as a result of the Helix GNOME packages. Based on my current
plans and the discussion on this list, I think that this sort of thing
will not happen again. Again, I apologize.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com