Re: new upstream stable release of pango (1.14.8)
On Sun, Nov 26, 2006, Steve Langasek wrote:
> I see that this has been uploaded now to unstable. Sorry for not commenting
> sooner.
No problem, I didn't think it bumped shlibs and thought it would give
it maximum testing delay if uploaded soonish to unstable.
> If pango1.0 is *still* not threadsafe even after the fixes in 1.14.8, why is
> it important to try to fix this crash in pango1.0 instead of fixing it
> comprehensively in nautilus?
That's the long term plan, but it was simple to fix this use case so it
was fixed, nautilus is a big beast.
> Unfortunately, the upload to unstable includes bumped shlibs, because
> pango1.0 bumps the shlibs for every new upstream version. I don't know
> whether the shlibs change is correct in this case; it certainly means we're
> going to have a hard time shipping with 1.14.7 now, though, given that there
> are already 27 packages blocking on the new pango1.0 update and it's only 2
> days old...
My apologies, I was certain it did not use -V and reviewed the debdiff
*.changes, but on a sarge machine which did not show the shlibs bump.
I wont repeat this last mistake and will change pango to not use -V the
next time. I don't want you to think I forced pango into testing. :-/
--
Loïc Minier <lool@dooz.org>
10 SIN
20 GO TO ROBOT HELL -- Temple of Robotology
Reply to: