[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Oldlibs transitions, and some old packages. (wx2.4)



On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 02:06:46PM -0500, Barry deFreese wrote:
> Hi folks, a couple of quick updates on wx2.4 packages.


>>> - ctsim, maintainer is also upstream

>> I've talk to Emmet on this one also.  Apparently ctsim builds fine 2.6 but 
>> segfaults and he is having a hard time tracking down the source of the 
>> issue.  I may try to get in touch with upstream.

> I've talked to upstream (which happens to be the Debian maintainer) and he 
> doesn't sound real interested in switching.  I may try to see if I can get 
> it running with wx2.6 anyway and maybe convince him.  Though he sounded 
> less resistant to wx2.8 but I don't think we have that yet right?

At this point, it looks like ctsim is in line to be the last wx2.4 package
in the archive.  In that circumstance, I don't think we should ship wx2.4
with lenny for the benefit of a single reverse-dep; that's about 400MB of
oldlibs packages carried around for one application.

>>> - jugglemaster, first ever upload last month (!?)

>> He says this one needs several hours of work.

> I created a patch for this which Vorlon fixed and I have now committed to 
> the games team SVN.

Does this need an uploader?

(The package in the archive mentions nothing about the Debian Games Team -
what's going on here?  This is also the same package that was uploaded as a
*new* package depending on wx2.4, right?)

I still think this app is trivial enough that providing both qt and
wxwidgets builds is senseless, but that's a maintainer decision to make
rather than a QA one given that a patch is available for the wx2.4 problem.

>>> - newpki-client, last upload 2 years ago, 26 installs in popcon

>> Upstream is pretty dead.  I have pinged the maintainer and he is going to 
>> try to contact upstream but they are pretty inactive.  He doesn't have 
>> time to update the package so if someone is willing..

> I have created a patch for this and sent to the maintainer.  I can put it 
> somewhere if anyone else is interested.

Preferably in the BTS, so that we have a documentation trail for any
regressions that might be introduced by the patch, as well as a suitable
counter on which to base NMUing of this package if the maintainer doesn't
act.

Thanks,
-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org


Reply to: