Re: elinks to be REMOVED from squeeze?
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 09:32:26PM -0500, Chris Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 09:09:40PM EST, Freeman wrote:
>
> [..]
>
> > Is there really even a point to filing a bug report against something
> > when the fix is upstream?
>
> What makes you think the bug is upstream?
>
Literally speaking, the idea that it
| is only a bug if the package doesn't track correctly
seems well worked out. In stable that would still be less than ideal since
it is a finished product. However our context seems to be a testing system
and a mixed-stable system.
I hadn't thought much of it and scarfed libtre5 from sid. Will it not
install to lenny?
> I recently installed the 0.13 git version of ELinks to resolve an
> unrelated issue and since lenny does not feature libtre5, the
> ./configure step gave me a warning and I was able to compile ELinks.
>
> The resulting ELinks version does not have the regex search capability
> on the search dialog, which is not a major problem where I'm concerned
> since in some 4-5 years of daily utilization of ELinks, I have never
> needed it.
>
Right, libtre5:
| a regexp matching library with approximate matching.
> I don't see why a dependency that would deprive you of an obscure
> optional feature such as this, which by the way is correctly handled by
> the stock ELinks install, would prevent installation of the debian
> package.
>
Possibly one reason aptitude will still download a broken package despite
that the force option is gone?
> As to the reason why ELinks of late requires libtre5, I suspect it has
> something to do with Unicode support, which has been vastly improved in
> recent versions.
>
Yes. I hope it will not be an elinks issue. I am fond of both elinks and
Unicode.
> I am not going to investigate this, but the output of 'git log' against
> my git clone strongly suggests this.
>
Very different bug definitions. Mine regards testing, compels me to
ascertain info and maybe file a report. Your's regards mixed-stable, seems
to involve triangulation and esoteric discussion. :)
--
Kind Regards,
Freeman
Reply to: