Your message dated Sat, 24 Mar 2012 08:25:03 -0300
with message-id <87zkb6z1f4.fsf@zancas.localnet>
and subject line bug is obsolete, closing
has caused the Debian Bug report #652060,
regarding darktable: request to cherry pick patches from upstream
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 ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
652060: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=652060
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: darktable
Version: 0.9.3-1
Severity: wishlist
Hi,
Would you please consider patching the Debian Darktable package with
the following patches cherry picked from git master:
Most importantly for better color rendition (both are very popular camera's):
>From 77081bceb1bd22508dc445603b9f65574aac6d51 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Pascal de Bruijn <pmjdebru...@pcode.nl>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 17:43:13 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Canon EOS 600D enhanced color matrix with help from emremeydan
>From 802c7ce2a718f15bd13f92a5ff074a27e09572d8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Pascal de Bruijn <pmjdebru...@pcode.nl>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 17:47:58 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Canon EOS 1000D enhanced color matrix with help from emremeydan
Less important but nice to have:
>From bcf49d2482e0320fab183d7f13e49791a731352e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Pascal de Bruijn <pmjdebru...@pcode.nl>
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2011 18:25:39 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Increase the unsharp mask threshold to 0.1
>From c432c92723842e9e4c546fa1681c8604b3d791ca Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Pascal de Bruijn <pmjdebru...@pcode.nl>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 16:19:24 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Use lossless AdobeDeflate compression for TIFFs
I did a patched 0.9.3 on my PPA as well, with no new issues as far as
I could see.
https://launchpad.net/~pmjdebruijn/+archive/darktable-unstable/+packages
The particular reason why I'm asking this, is that your 0.9.3 package
has made it into Ubuntu Precise (next LTS), and 0.10.0 probably won't
make it (which is probably a good thing for an LTS release, since our
0.x.0 releases are traditionally fairly buggy).
While Ubuntu releases aren't your primary concern, Debian users will
potentially benefit from the above patches in the meanwhile as well.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (900, 'testing')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 3.1.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_CA.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_CA.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Versions of packages darktable depends on:
ii gconf2 2.32.4-1
ii gtk2-engines 1:2.20.2-1
ii libatk1.0-0 2.2.0-2
ii libc6 2.13-21
ii libcairo2 1.10.2-6.1
ii libcurl3-gnutls 7.22.0-3
ii libdbus-1-3 1.4.16-1
ii libdbus-glib-1-2 0.98-1
ii libexiv2-9 0.20-2.1
ii libfreetype6 2.4.8-1
ii libgcc1 1:4.6.2-5
ii libgconf2-4 2.32.4-1
ii libgdk-pixbuf2.0-0 2.24.0-1
ii libglib2.0-0 2.30.2-4
ii libgnome-keyring0 3.2.2-1
ii libgomp1 4.6.2-5
ii libgphoto2-2 2.4.11-3.1
ii libgtk2.0-0 2.24.8-2
ii libilmbase6 1.0.1-3
ii libjpeg8 8c-2
ii liblcms2-2 2.2+git20110628-2
ii liblensfun0 0.2.4-1
ii libopenexr6 1.6.1-4.1
ii libpango1.0-0 1.29.4-2
ii libpng12-0 1.2.46-3
ii librsvg2-2 2.34.2-1
ii libsqlite3-0 3.7.9-2
ii libstdc++6 4.6.2-5
ii libtiff4 3.9.5-2
ii libxml2 2.7.8.dfsg-5
ii zlib1g 1:1.2.3.4.dfsg-3
darktable recommends no packages.
darktable suggests no packages.
-- no debconf information
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Now that 1.0 has been uploaded, there is no need to cherry-pick these
patches.
--- End Message ---
_______________________________________________
Pkg-phototools-devel mailing list
Pkg-phototools-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-phototools-devel
