Re: Bug#503712: the gs-common problem
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 02:15:22PM +0100, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
> immediately after I sent the last mail, Sune Vuorela pointed me to
> apache2's fix for #390823: They simply remove the problematic maintainer
> The question then is where to do this in so it is reliably done before
> stuff happens.
> In one of the perl packages (because the upgrade of perl triggers this)
> is probably too ugly, maybe the configure script of ghostscript?
I think it's too late to do it inside ghostscript, it would have to go
Not sure if the case where perl-base is upgraded first and perl-modules
lacks behind is just theoretical, but it would create the same effect.
It would mean we'd need the hack in perl-base too.
I'm obviously not thrilled by this ugliness, but it's doable.
Thomas, thanks for driving this.
Niko Tyni firstname.lastname@example.org