Hi Rotty, On Sat, May 14, 2005 at 03:03:14PM +0200, Andreas Rottmann wrote: > I prepared an upload for gwrapguile and fix #308499. The changelog > looks like this: > * Move /usr/bin/g-wrap-config to libgwrapguile-dev (closes: #308499). > * Include manpage for g-wrap-config. > * Make libgwrapguile-dev depend on guile, since g-wrap-config is a > guile script. > * g-wrap.m4: Fix underquoted definitions (closes: #274478). > * Build-Depend on debhelper (>> 4). > * Bump policy version to 3.6.1 (no changes). > * Fix malformed jgoerzen email address in changelog. > These are all changes that have little or no impact (besides the one > fixing #308499), but fix packaging issues. So my question is: would > the above be suitable to go into sarge, or should I prepare an upload > that just fixes #308499? Yes, all of those should be reasonable to allow in via unstable. (Although FWIW, there's not much reason to add a versioned build-dep on debhelper given that woody had debhelper 4.0.2.) Does your fix for 308499 also include a Replaces: against the old, broken version of libgwrapguile1? Thanks, -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature