Re: A Round of Removals
Matt Zimmerman <mdz@debian.org> writes:
> On Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 09:55:47PM +0200, Jochen Voss wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 10:58:36AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > > Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
> > > > Those of you who didn't sense the malicious subtext of the above,
> > > > may wish to have another look at that URL fairly soon. In particular,
> > > > a large number of effectively unmaintained packages on that list have
> > > > been marked for removal. [...]
> > >
> > > Is there a list available with just the [REMOVE] packages, rather than
> > > getting the lists of all packages and searching
> >
> > I doubt that all of these packages are "effectively unmaintained",
> > but from dissecting the html file I get the following list.
> > Prominent entries are "acroread" and "netscape".
>
> Both acroread and netscape have security bugs that we CANNOT reasonably fix
> due to their non-freeness. These are probably two of the most justified
> removals. It is possible that newer versions of Netscape Navigator (at
> least 4.79 seems to exist) may fix this bug, but I cannot say for sure.
> Newer versions of Acrobat Reader are not redistributable (see the BTS), so
> this needs to go anyway.
Yes and what think about create an acroread-installer package?
> > kaffe
>
> An RC bug with a one-line patch in the BTS for 158 days? Surely someone
> cares more about kaffe. If not, perhaps gcj and sablevm will provide
> replacement functionality.
I think kaffe is a very important package and have a new upstream
version waiting for maintainer.
In BTS exist a mail about someone (I can't remember the name) want
maintain and care about this package. I like ;)
[]s
--
O T A V I O S A L V A D O R
---------------------------------------------
E-mail: otavio@debian.org UIN: 5906116
GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855
Home Page: http://www.freedom.ind.br/otavio
---------------------------------------------
Reply to: