Re: texinfo/info packages and TeX live
On Fre, 19 Aug 2005, Frank Küster wrote:
> I would prefer to indicate why we NMU, like "to adress bug #..)
> s/upstram realease/upstream release/
> Those bugs aren't all "please update texinfo", are they? Then it is
> good practice to indicate what they really are about, like
Better like this:
* NMU to address a series of bugs, especially Bug #320413
* new upstream release
- provides texi2pdf (Closes: #320413)
- fixes loss of pipe character in TeX verbatim mode (Closes: #181793)
- fixes incorrect html output (h3-h4) (Closes: #204202, #205022)
- output correct XML (Closes: #221988)
- adds commands for serif fonts (Closes: #277754)
* install texinfo HTML documentation (Closes: #277921)
* include changes by Pierre Machard for Replaces (Closes: #261742)
* make postinst script POSIX-compliant, don't use command (Closes: #293053)
* fix de.po, thanks Jens Seidel (Closes: #313844)
* uses new tex-common and install fmtutil-config files (Closes: #253124)
* install install-info as ginstall-info (Closes: #285983)
* bumped Standards-Version to 3.6.2.1 (no changes necessary)
* change debian compat version to 4
> Oh, I forgot something: Since you take over files from tetex-bin_2.0.2,
> you have to indicate this in the control fields.
I wait with the new package (but still -0.1) until I understand this. DO
I have do add a Replace: ... line?
Best wishes
Norbert
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Norbert Preining <preining AT logic DOT at> Università di Siena
sip:preining@at43.tuwien.ac.at +43 (0) 59966-690018
gpg DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOBWALLS (pl.n.)
The now hard-boiled bits of nastiness which have to be prised off
crockery by hand after it has been through a dishwasher.
--- Douglas Adams, The Meaning of Liff
Reply to: