Re: Please approve muttprint 0.72d-1
* Rene Engelhard (email@example.com) [050522 21:05]:
> Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> > > On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 01:26:46AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > > > > Also, I couldn't locate the place where the upstream maintainer changed,
> > > > > nor the place where MAINT_SEARCH was disabled. (And the diff is a bit
> > > > > verbose due to changing the path of the diffs - well, I don't mind too
> > > > > much for _this_ part.)
> > > >
> > > > It's in upstreams tarball whose diff isn't visible because this is a
> > > > dbs-using package :). If you really want, you can get a 0.72c -> 0.72d diff,
> > > > though...
> > >
> > > Yes, please.
> > Attached. Please note that the changes in the html files do not affect
> > anything since those files are not packaged. And if they were, they
> > would have been rebuilt during the build anyway to fix paths in them.
> Oops. 310K attachement. I should have checked the size. Anyway, It seems
> it didn't get got through; if it did sorry. Here's the patch again on the web:
approved. But - this packages shows a very nice example why I'm _very_
unhappy with scripts like cdbs or so - they just break debdiff.
PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C