On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 02:02:38PM +1000, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > * Matthias Klose <doko@cs.tu-berlin.de> [2003-09-29 22:47]: > > but one of it's build-dep's is listed as: > > -gimp1.2 (1.2.3-2.4 to -) > > * Maintainer: Ben Gertzfield > > * Valid candidate > > so probably, it doesn't make sense to move it to testing, if gimp1.2 > > is removed. > Actually, gimp1.2 still exists; there were two gimp1.2 packages and > one got removed. Does testing cope with this? > gimp1.2 | 1.2.3-2.4 | testing | source, alpha, arm, hppa, i386, ia64, m68k, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc > gimp1.2 | 1.2.5-3 | unstable | all Yes, testing copes with this just fine; since gimp1.2 now comes from the gimp source package, when gimp makes it into testing the old source/binary packages will be removed. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgpcC9hPQ0lrX.pgp
Description: PGP signature