On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 11:01:08PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote: > I am not sure what the status is on non-free packages, but libcwd > has really not been treated nicely: > 220 days old (needed 10 days) > I have requested it to be built several times and for architectures > to be masked (or whatever that was called), but have been ignored > apparently. > Since non-free will also have a sarge component and 0.99.37 has many > critical bugs that 0.99.39 fixes, I herewith request for libcwd to > be hinted for inclusion, and if it's only i386. The library was > designed for i386 only, but so far, I have not been able to get it > to break on other architectures. Thus, the other architectures have > been left in, but I would be satisfied if it at least came for i386. > Thanks for your consideration. Does this mean that the libcwd in testing is also non-free, and is in the wrong section? -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature