Hi Norbert! On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 07:55:57PM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote: > On Do, 21 Okt 2010, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > > I got now some feedback from the users at our site and the backported > > patch seems to be ok. I have raised again the severity to 'important' > > Having an ok patch does not mean the severity is important. > > It was originally important as submitted by you, and Himar (I think) > adjusted it correctly to normal, as this is only a small part > of the whole package, so it does not render it useless. It was me setting it to normal. The term 'useless' I meant was not for the full package, but only for pdfcrop. I was undecided, and raised then back to important, but not because of the reason that I had a patch, simply undecided about the 'importance' not having pdfcrop working. > > due the ghostscript bug (if you do not agree on the severity, please > > downgrade, will then not change it again). > > Actually, one can even say that is not my problem, ghostscript should > be fixed! I agree here too with you! It would be defintively better if ghostscript could be fixed. Upstream of pdfcrop however added himself a workaround to pdfcrop to have pdfcrop working even with 'broken' ghostscript version. > > Would be really great to have pdfcrop working again in Lenny! > > I don't have time to prepare updated packages for lenny atm, if one > of the others here on the list can take that, fine. Ok, thank you for your feedback Norbert. So hope someone of the others on the list would finde time for it! Bests Salvatore
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature