On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 11:19:18AM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote: > On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 04:41:13PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 08:15:16AM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote: > > > Mutter mutter. > > Is the previous "master-filter" implementation no longer viable code? > > Could you not grab it from an old version and ship it with the new > > lprngtool? > Possibly. I'm going to have to look into it further, but from what I can > figure out, that master-filter was just some shell script, which > automagically determined which printer specific filter to use. The new > version of lprngtool seems to have switched over to using ifhp in a similar > manner. > I'm of the philosophy that a Debian package of upstream software should > reasonably accurately represent what you'd get if you nipped off and grabbed > the source tarball yourself and built it. For that reason, I'm reluctant to > bolt on part of lprngtool 1.1.1 onto lprngtool 1.3.2, but that is just my > personal philosophy towards packaging, to avoid breakage, it may workout > better to do as you've suggested. FWIW, I disagree; providing continuity of functionality across upgrades is one of the most important value-adds we offer over upstream tarballs. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgp3i5IqjRFl3.pgp
Description: PGP signature