Follow-up Comment #6, bug #68271 (group groff): [comment #5 commentaire #5 :] > Is Debian the de facto upstream maintainer for fvwm2?
As one can see at https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/fvwm there is very little activity: since 2022, 2 patches on the Debian side due to issues coming from the upgrade of other packages. This would be similar with groff 1.24. > Do you know where I should best send patches addressing issues in fvwm 2's > man pages? I've just submitted a bug report concerning the Fvwm2Cpp(1) man page at least: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1134825 So patches could be sent to this bug, where a tag "patch" can then be added. Then let's hope that the Debian maintainer will publish a new version (but end users can also rebuild the package from the source + the patch, which is something I often do). _______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?68271> _______________________________________________ Message posté via Savannah https://savannah.gnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
