Bug#856652: RFS: xpdf/3.0.4.real-4
On Wed, 2017-03-08 at 12:48 -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Dear Svante,
>
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 06:55:18AM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> > I still don't get it. The proposed package _doesn't_ depend on poppler any
> > more.
> > If you have problems with previous xpdf+poppler versions up to 3.04-4,
> > remove these from the archive then!
>
> I don't see how we could explain it any differently.
>
> We are saying that is _should_ depend on poppler.
No it should NOT! Poppler is a fork of xpdf 3.0, released before 2006! 3.01 was
released in 2006. The latest upstream version is 3.04, released May 2014.
Unfortunately the code bases have diverged too much to be feasible. Please
consider these facts.
> After the release of stretch, I intend to work on removing xpdf from the
> archive for the reason that it is unmaintainable, not because it depends
> on poppler.
xpdf in NOT unmaintainable, see below. The poppler-based version of xpdf is yes,
I agree.
As I wrote in another reply to the Wanderer:
FYI: Upstream is working on a new release, soon to be released.
FYI: There was an effort to create xpdf-poppler, see:
https://github.com/rbrito/xpdf-poppler. But that project has not had any commits
since December 2013, so it could be regarded as dead by now.
And FYI:
Quoting from upstream, sent to me yesterday:
> Regarding security bugs, I try to respond to those as quickly as
> possible.
What else do you need? What are your problems with a _real_ upstream xpdf?
Reply to: