[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#648341: Bug #648341: ITA: abiword -- efficient, featureful word processor



On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 19:47, Dmitry Smirnov <onlyjob@member.fsf.org> wrote:
> Hi Aaron,
>
> Thank you very much for your response.
>
> New upstream release can't be prepared until libgoffice-0.10 will be available
> in Debian.
>

Okay, let's be patient.

> Regarding #648153 (abiword: FTBFS on hurd-i386)
>
> I'll see what I can do. I will not be able to verify those patches so I'm a
> bit reluctant to introduce 'em. What would be the best to do in this
> situation?
>

Well, you'd better to response to that bug report, and ask the porter
to give you a better patch.

> I might have already fixed the detection of TOOLKIT_GTK by the packaging
> update: I introduced autoreconf which also made obsolete some of the previous
> maintainer's patches.

Good.

> Certainly I can fix #655308 (FTBFS: multiple problems) unless it's already
> fixed in my build.
>
> I think 608164 (abiword.desktop does not validate) no longer apply to 2.9.1
>

Then don't forget to close them in debian/copyright when your next
upload is ready.

> I'm also preparing abiword-docs package (see #556958) which will be ready
> tomorrow. Would you be able to sponsor it as well?
>

I'm looking into it, and will reply to that bug once I found something
to be improved, or just upload it if I see it's good enough.

> I'm very glad you responded to this.
> I was waiting for quite a while for abiword to be sponsored.
> Frankly during this time I learned few packaging tricks so I'll review my
> packaging once again. I'm planning to switch from CDBS to debhelper, but not
> necessarily now.
>
> I hope to hear from you soon.
>

You can send email to debian-mentors@lists.debian.org asking
sponsorship, so you might not need to wait for so long. I accidentally
found this report when I was checking some FTBFS in the archive.

It's good to learn that you have improved your skills, congrats!

-- 
Regards,
Aron Xu



Reply to: