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

Bug#814930: marked as done (jessie-pu: package hplip/3.15.11+repack0-1)

Your message dated Wed, 2 Mar 2016 12:51:26 -0800
with message-id <20160302205126.GA13211@smetana.kardiogramm.net>
and subject line Re: Bug#814930: jessie-pu: package hplip/3.15.11+repack0-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #814930,
regarding jessie-pu: package hplip/3.15.11+repack0-1
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
814930: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=814930
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
Tags: jessie
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: pu

I asked the printing people how they felt about an backport of hplip,
and OdyX suggested [0]:

> As far as I remember (but could never take the time to actively
> check), the Debian Stable Managers were open to update packages in
> Stable for hardware support (and "new HP Printer" would qualify). I
> haven't checked the hplip code to see whether a full new upstream
> release would make sense over backporting specific parts though.

> tl;dr: I'd check with the SRMs first.

How would you feel about a wholesale backport of hplip, to stable?

No debdiff attached, because it's scary huge. Not even a diffstat,
because:

> 4362 files changed, 1703256 insertions(+), 17230 deletions(-)

[0]: https://lists.debian.org/3588455.xzKu8qgoUi@odyx.org

SR

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Hi Julien (2016.02.23_10:54:10_-0800)
> This was mostly putting a feeler out, as Didier thought you may be interested
> in a stable update, that supported new hardware. It seems to not be the
> case, so maybe I should just do a backport.

We did that. jak is uploading a backport.

SR

-- 
Stefano Rivera
  http://tumbleweed.org.za/
  +1 415 683 3272

--- End Message ---
Reply to: