Bug#132232: need new upstream?

[Atsuhito Kohda <kohda@pm.tokushima-u.ac.jp>]

I don't know context at all but I investigated this
report a bit and found the followings;

there is no texexec.ini in tetex-base_1.0.2+20011202.orig.tar.gz
as the following shows;

civic:~$ tar ztvf tetex-base_1.0.2+20011202.orig.tar.gz | grep texexec
-rw-r--r-- bunk/bunk      4675 2001-06-18 04:30:34 tetex-texmf-20011202/texmf/context/config/texexec

but there is certainly texexec.ini in teTeX-texmf-beta-20020207.tar.gz
as the following shows;

civic:~$ tar ztvf teTeX-texmf-beta-20020207.tar.gz | grep texexec
-rw-r--r-- te/te        111621 2001-11-14 05:57:36 ./doc/context/base/mtexexec.pdf
-rw-r--r-- te/te          4873 2001-09-07 22:55:16 ./context/config/texexec.ini
-rw-r--r-- te/te         78851 2002-01-21 05:48:36 ./context/perltk/texexec.pl
-rw-r--r-- te/te          4873 2001-09-07 22:55:16 ./context/perltk/texexec.rme

so I believe that we should upgrade to teTeX-texmf-beta-20020207.tar.gz

Perhaps the same applies with #132237

Best regards,			    2002.3.18

-- 
 Debian Developer & Debian JP Developer - much more I18N of Debian
 Atsuhito Kohda <kohda@debian.org>
 Department of Math., Univ. of Tokushima