Re: CVS commits
Hilmar Preusse <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 11.04.05 Frank Küster (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote:
>> Does anybody who is active on the list have a complete checkout of
>> the tetex-bin and -base 2.0.2 source trees, and enough disk space
>> to check out an other one and do the actual comparison? Please Cc
>> me if the answer is (partially) "no", I still have them.
> What I have is the 2.0.2c.orig.tar.gz and the diff.gz as of -7. As
> far as I understand the CVS log, you didn't make changes since them.
Note that the mess reported up to now was in tetex-bin. Right now I
also found one corrupted file in tetex-base;
/cvs/tetex/tetex-base/debian/patches/Attic/suet.pdf.uu,v was a mbox file
with some NMU changelog messages from debian-changes...
But anyway, I have checked that the debian subdirectories of tetex-bin
and -base are in order, also texmf.d and new-manpages, at least as far
as unstable is concerned.. The only interesting comparison is between
the orig.tar.gz and the corresponding subdirs from a fresh checkout.
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich