Bug#370282: Worth mentioning that Gnome needs a fix for newer
lool at dooz.org
Mon Jun 5 08:43:06 UTC 2006
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > However, I wonder whether it's worth mentioning breakage of
> > important software like Gnome in Autoconf's NEWS (or elsewhere),
> > and I told Loïc that I'd make that suggestion here. Consider it
> > made :-)
> I wonder what's necessary to make the NEWS item explicit enough:
> - it's the single biggest item in the NEWS entries since 2.59.
> - it's one of the two items that I've explicitly hinted at as well
> in the 2.59c release notes.
I want to make it clear here: I didn't check Autoconf's NEWS because it
isn't presented to me automatically on package upgrades, I expected a
NEWS.Debian to warn me of anything to take care of.
When I installed the CVS snapshot of autoconf on my Debian box, I
expected some problems to pop up with various software, but I didn't
see any backward incompatibility warnings. Strictly speaking, none of
what I reported against the Debian autoconf package was a backward
incompatibility or upstream regression, yet it would affect so many
software packages that it was worth highlighting and warning about.
All I want is that Debian's NEWS (which is presented to the end-user /
end-developer on upgrades) warns of important changes, and when a nice
document such as upstream's NEWS is already available, I consider that
all that is needed is a pointer to this document or a summary of the
most important issues.
It seems Ben already proposed a NEWS.Debian which outlines the
problems I encountered, and that completely addresses my wish that a
big warning pops up when you upgrade your autoconf package (thanks
> I will mention it prominently again for 2.59d, and of course for 2.60.
> Please tell me what else is necessary. Please consider making this item
> and the exit(3) one part of a NEWS.Debian, if NEWS isn't read enough.
I'm afraid "NEWS" is not presented automatically on upgrades, probably
because it isn't easily machine-readable, and because it doesn't take
Debian specificities into account.
I also had the feeling you were frustrated that I didn't see the NEWS
document prior to reporting this bug. I'm sorry that you spent extra
effort in properly documenting this, I should have checked NEWS and
requested a pointer to NEWS from our NEWS.Debian in the first place.
Thanks for following this and sorry for requesting documentation of
things already clearly documented upstream.
Loïc Minier <lool at dooz.org>
More information about the Pkg-gnome-maintainers