Re: RFS: sitemesh (fix a FTBFS bug)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On 2011-05-08 20:42, Miguel Landaeta wrote:
> Hi team,
>
> I'm looking for a sponsor for this new release of
> sitemesh. Here is the latest changelog entry:
>
> sitemesh (2.4.1+dfsg-2) UNRELEASED; urgency=low
>
> * Fix FTBFS caused by API changes in Velocity Tools 2.0. (Closes: #625764).
> * Bump Standards-Version to 3.9.2. No changes were required.
> * Rename Servlet compatibility patch filename for clarity's sake.
> * Replace dependencies on libservlet2.4-java with libservlet2.5-java.
> * Wrap dependencies list correctly.
> * Remove unneeded dependencies on JREs.
> * Remove redundant fields in control file.
> * Remove typo in Vcs-Git field.
> * Fix javadocs generation and add links to system javadoc.
> * Update copyright dates and make it DEP-5 compliant.
>
> -- Miguel Landaeta <miguel@miguel.cc> Sat, 07 May 2011 13:14:47 -0430
>
>
> Vcs-Git: git://git.debian.org/pkg-java/sitemesh.git
>
> I would be glad if someone uploaded this packages for me.
> Cheers,
>
Hi
Looks like the installed jar still has a classpath of servlet 2.4
instead of 2.5?
~Niels
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/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=pwVo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: