Bug#531595: Bug#531569: Fixing LaTeX in oldstable

[Luk Claes <luk@debian.org>]

Norbert Preining wrote:
> Hi Luk, hi Frank,
> 
> On Do, 18 Jun 2009, Norbert Preining wrote:
>> On Do, 11 Jun 2009, Frank Küster wrote:
>>> I am right now uploading an again-installable tetex-bin to
>>> oldstable-proposed-updates (I hope that's correct?), and texlive-bin
>>> will follow soon. Both uploads have been built in etch pbuilder chroots,
>>> and have been tested to fix the problem.
>>>
>>> The changes are small, essentially only one patch file is added, and
>>> except for the changelog one file in debian/ is changed, namely the
>>> quilt series file (for tetex-bin) or the dpatch 00list file.  The
>>> patch is attached.
>>>
>>>
>>> Do we need to do anything else (besides fixing stable and sid, but that
>>> isn't urgent since the bug won't show up soon)?
>> sid will be fixed soon, but I have uploaded 
>> 	texlive-bin	2007.dfsg.2-4+lenny1
>> to proposed-stable-updates which includes the same fix as tetex and
>> texlive-bin 2005 uploaded by Frank.
> 
> One more problem was found: While the generation of latex format was
> fixed by this change in the correct way, the generation of three other
> formats (cslatex/pdfcslatex from texlive-lang-czechslovak, xelatex
> from texlive-xetex, and mllatex from texlive-formats-extra) are also 
> broken because they *stop* at the warning message and do not generate
> the format.
> 
> The latex.ini file that is loaded when generating the (pdf)latex formats
> contains the line
> 	\scrollmode
> which makes the engine (pdftex/...) *not* stop at the respective
> message. Unfortunately that line is missing from mllatex.ini,
> cslatex.ini, xelatex.ini.
> 
> I have prepared:
> 	texlive-base	2007.dfsg.2-1~lenny2
> 	texlive-lang	2007.dfsg.4-1+lenny1
> 	texlive-extra	2007.dfsg.17-1~lenny02
> for stable-proposed updates.
> 
> The last one would replace the ~lenny01 package that is already in
> stable. 
> 
> The texlive-lang is the first update for stable.
> 
> The question is about the first, texlive-base, where I have already
> uploaded one version (~lenny1) to stable-proposed-updates, but that has
> not been accepted by now.
> 
> Should I upload a new ~lenny1 with the additional fixes or should I
> upload ~lenny1 for that package?

You should not reuse changelog entries unless they were not uploaded or
made public yet.

Please upload accordingly.

Cheers

Luk