Bug#705424: symbols/is: A reverse change created a lie in the file
Package: xkb-data
Version: 2.5.1-3
Severity: normal
File: /usr/share/X11/xkb/symbols/is
I have already formulated this subject in
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43173
First bug report is in Debian Bug #649519.
Changes in Debian file "xkeyboard-config_2.5.1-3.diff" are:
--- xkeyboard-config-2.5.1.orig/symbols/is
+++ xkeyboard-config-2.5.1/symbols/is
@@ -21,14 +21,14 @@
key <AE12> { [ minus, underscore, dead_cedilla, dead_ogonek ] };
key <AD11> { [ eth, ETH, dead_diaeresis, dead_abovering ] };
- key <AD12> { [apostrophe, question, dead_tilde, dead_macron ] };
+ key <AD12> { [apostrophe, question, asciitilde, dead_macron ] };
key <AC10> { [ ae, AE, asciicircum, dead_doubleacute ] };
key <AC11> { [dead_acute, dead_acute, dead_circumflex, dead_caron ] };
key <TLDE> { [dead_abovering, dead_diaeresis, notsign, hyphen ] };
// <AC12> = <BKSL>
- key <BKSL> { [ plus, asterisk, dead_grave, dead_breve ] };
+ key <BKSL> { [ plus, asterisk, grave, dead_breve ] };
// <AB00> = <LSGT>, is in file "pc": pc105
key <AB10> { [ thorn, THORN, dead_belowdot, dead_abovedot ] };
As the complainers have not answered any questions in the above
thread (freedesktop.org), some more are due.
How were the complainers' complaints scrutinised? Why?
What quality assessments where they subjected to and what not? Why?
What do these changes comform to and to what not? Why?
The complainers use their ignorance as an argument for their cause
(changes), and it was accepted by Debian's maintainer(s) and upstream
by applying the above pseudo solution.
Are Debian's maintainers oriented towards quality?
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 6.0.6 (my current version; report applies to wheezy)
APT prefers stable-updates
APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'proposed-updates'), (500, 'stable')
Architecture: i386 (i586)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-46b
Locale: LANG=is_IS, LC_CTYPE=is_IS (charmap=ISO-8859-1)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
-- no debconf information
--
Bjarni I. Gislason
Reply to: