Bug#986686: missing b-d netpbm?
On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 10:13:20PM +0200, Hilmar Preuße wrote:
> Am 13.07.2021 um 16:13 teilte Adrian Bunk mit:
>...
> Hi Adrian,
Hi Hilmar,
> > > > > The Makefile has a fallback to netpbm, but this does not work as
> > > > > we do not declare a B-D on netpbm. We could simply add it.
> > > > >
> > > > > What do you think?
> > > >
> > > > yes, that would be nice. Afaics, Ubuntu disabled that explicitly in
> > > > https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/imagemagick/8:6.9.10.23+dfsg-2.1ubuntu3
> > > >
> > > Patch tested and committed to github, tag pending.
> >
> > Please upload, since this is now also a FTBFS in Debian:
> > https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/rb-pkg/buster/amd64/texworks-manual.html
> >
> > See #987504 for background.
> >
> Will you accept a new upstream snapshot to fix the issue?
>
> In this case I'd branch from our commit
> d85a18296e529ed7ba4af1945fab8c90670835a6 and use that one as starter. It is
> just documentation so it should not break other packages.
I am not a member of the release team.
"It is just documentation" has a point, suggesting d85a1829 plus
UNRELEASED -> unstable would sound reasonable to me.
You could ask the release team by submitting an unblock request with
reportbug release.debian.org
containing a diff of debian/ between the version currently in testing
and what you'd like to upload.
> Hilmar
cu
Adrian
Reply to: