On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 10:59:55PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote: > I've written a crude script to go through Contents-i386.gz file > to find some suspiciously looking shared library packages. > It does show up some false positives, but > there seem to be real problematic libraries around. > There are many false positives, but here is a list: [..] > usr/lib/libSDL-1.2.so.0 libs/libsdl1.2debian-all,libs/libsdl1.2debian-oss,libs/libsdl1.2debian-esd,libs/libsdl1.2debian-arts 0 I will welcome a bug (not RC please) regarding this. It is on my private list of things to fix at some point in the future. I have not done so before now because of the obvious problems with the fact that it would be a confusing change and I only just inherited this package recently and it is simply not acceptable to make this sort of change in the middle of a freeze. I will be repackaging SDL with DBS at some point in the near future to help me better manage patches against it, but the hospital stay has obviously impeded my ability to work on it. Also, I must admit I have absolutely no ambition to learn how to use DBS and do all of this work until woody is out the door since I have already made the decision not to release such a thing until after woody was out, just in case. Additionally, I will be packaging snapshots of SDL's CVS with a caveat: the snapshot packages will have a permanent release-critical bug against them to ensure that they are _never_ added to testing and released with any version of Debian. Those who develop with SDL are encouraged to run the latest CVS version, but there may be bugs which the unwashed masses should not be exposed to. I figure if you're willing to run Debian unstable and choose the option of having an unstable SDL as well, you should be able to without risking breaking things in Debian otherwise. I will also be applying some of these patches from SDL's CVS to the Debian packages if they don't change anything in a bad way, but generally only bugfixes will I do this with, for obvious reasons. The RC bug is necessary I think, Sam Lantinga has expressed concern that a snapshot package may be released - this could be a potentially very bad thing - the CVS snapshot we were using for awhile there had a small API change which was reverted soon after and even that was in Debian for weeks until pressing need caused Sam to branch off 1.2.4. No programs started using these changed API features (Though had they not been reverted so quickly, I would have started doing so..) Whoa, I got a bit off the subject there, sorry dancer.. I'd better add a Cc for the SDL list. =p -- Joseph Carter <email@example.com> Sooner or later, BOOM! <Cylord> Would it be acceptable to debian policy if we inserted a crontab by default into potato that emailed firstname.lastname@example.org every morning with an email that read, "Don't worry, linux is a fad..."
Description: PGP signature