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

f-prot-installer needs update in stable again



Dear release team,

unfortunately the f-prot-installer package is again broken by upstream
changes. The release of f-prot 4.6.2 includes a modification of the
check-updates.pl script incompatible with the installer script in the
package. Therefore I would like to ask for an update in stable.

An inter version diff is attached. The change is a one-liner.

Thanks,

Johannes

BTW: If this continues, I consider moving the package over to
volatile.d.n.
-- 
http://www.infoe.de/

diff -uNr f-prot-installer-0.5.14.sarge.1/debian/changelog f-prot-installer-0.5.14.sarge.2/debian/changelog
--- f-prot-installer-0.5.14.sarge.1/debian/changelog	2005-09-10 20:34:24.000000000 +0200
+++ f-prot-installer-0.5.14.sarge.2/debian/changelog	2005-10-23 18:05:57.000000000 +0200
@@ -1,3 +1,12 @@
+f-prot-installer (0.5.14.sarge.2) stable; urgency=low
+
+  * Sigh. Vendor has modified check-updates.pl, making it incompatible
+    with our wonderful update-f-prot script. To solve this, when patching
+    check-updates.pl, we have to delete the line containing the string
+    "Couldn't determine signature file directory".
+
+ -- Johannes Rohr <jr.debian@rohr.org>  Sun, 23 Oct 2005 18:05:56 +0200
+
 f-prot-installer (0.5.14.sarge.1) stable; urgency=medium
 
   * Package was rendered unusable by external changes. Fix: Instead of
diff -uNr f-prot-installer-0.5.14.sarge.1/debian/update-f-prot f-prot-installer-0.5.14.sarge.2/debian/update-f-prot
--- f-prot-installer-0.5.14.sarge.1/debian/update-f-prot	2005-09-10 20:44:06.000000000 +0200
+++ f-prot-installer-0.5.14.sarge.2/debian/update-f-prot	2005-10-23 21:03:01.000000000 +0200
@@ -238,6 +238,7 @@
 	sed \
 	    -e "s,^my \$signatureDirectory = .*,my \$signatureDirectory = \'/var/lib/f-prot/\';,g" \
 	    -e 's,/usr/local/f-prot,/usr/lib/f-prot,g' \
+	    -e "/or die..Couldn.t determine signature file directory/d" \
 	    -e 's,check-updates\.pl,check-updates,g' \
 	    $f > $f.new
 	if cmp --silent $f $f.new; then

Reply to: