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

Bug#1010337: marked as done (move /usr/bin/luit to its own package)

Your message dated Tue, 14 Nov 2023 18:06:32 -0500
with message-id <ZVP9eLJ9VLfzH03z@prl-debianold-64.jexium-island.net>
and subject line Re: Bug#1010337: move /usr/bin/luit to its own package
has caused the Debian Bug report #1010337,
regarding move /usr/bin/luit to its own package
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
1010337: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1010337
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: x11-utils
Version: 7.7+5

Hi folks,

If I set

	XTerm*locale: true

then xterm requires /usr/bin/luit, which can be found in x11-utils.
x11-utils puts appr 150 MByte additional files and directories into
/, even if Install-Recommends is set to false.

Would it be possible to move luit to its own package, reducing the
footprint of xterm for strict UTF-8 support? Actually luit is not
even an XWindow program:

	% ldd /usr/bin/luit
        linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007fff0cda2000)
        libfontenc.so.1 => /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libfontenc.so.1 (0x00007f62f4d03000)
        libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x00007f62f4b3e000)
        libz.so.1 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libz.so.1 (0x00007f62f4b21000)
        /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007f62f4d3d000)



Regards

Harri

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: x11-utils
Version: 7.7+6

-- 
Thomas E. Dickey <dickey@invisible-island.net>
https://invisible-island.net

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


--- End Message ---
Reply to: