[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#71107: [wmono@debian.org: Re: RFC: removal of libqt1g from woody]

> > I would also recommend removing explorer as it depends on a non-existant 
> > package (qt1g and not libqt1g) and therefore isn't installable.
> done.
> I cannot remove explorer unless the maintainer asks. besides, it should be
> recompilable with qt2.2.

ok...the source we (Debian) have for explorer does not compile against qt2.
The web site it refers to (and ftp site) don't work...it also seems that
upstream has changed the name of the package...and that site is also non
functional.  All documentation I have seen on the net says it is coded for
qt1 only and that documentation is 3 years old.

As it is now the current package does not work, cannot be installed due
to dependencies, and it's not part of main.  The last few uploads have
been done as NMU's...

I understand not removing a package that works without the maintainers 
approval, but a package that is non-functional and un-installable?
(not trying to beat you up..just trying to understand...if this is 
policy then I need to bring this scenerio up to debian-policy...)

Anyways,  I will continue to look online for this and hope either to get
it to work or for the Maintainer to pipe up.


Ivan E. Moore II
GPG Fingerprint=F2FC 69FD 0DA0 4FB8 225E 27B6 7645 8141 90BC E0DD

Attachment: pgpsZ1_Z6rrn_.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: