Your message dated Mon, 03 Oct 2022 07:37:05 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#975597: fixed in xft 2.3.6-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #975597,
regarding libxft2: fonts-noto-color-emoji causes protocol error in libxft
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
Hi,
this has been fixed upstream in version 2.3.5:
| Add support for BGRA glyphs display and scaling
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/lib/libxft/-/blob/libXft-2.3.5/NEWS
I've merged the latest 2.3.6 locally and it seems to work fine.
Would be great to get that into unstable.
Cheers J
Package: libxft2
Version: 2.3.2-2
Severity: important
Tags: patch
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear Maintainer,
libxft seems to have a known issue where color emojis cause it crash the
app with an X11 protocol error, e.g.:
X Error of failed request: BadLength (poly request too
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> fixed 915027 2.3.2-2
Bug #915027 [libxft-dev] libxft-dev should be installable for multiple
architectures simultaneously
Marked as fixed in versions xft/2.3.2-2.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assi
Your message dated Fri, 30 Nov 2018 10:31:09 +0200
with message-id <7e879662-2a43-28c0-67e8-d6b9f2d94...@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#915027: libxft-dev should be installable for multiple
architectures simultaneously
has caused the Debian Bug report #915027,
regarding libxft-dev sho
To be completely transparent, I did this on Ubuntu 16.04, but the
package has not been changed significantly that I can see. So, that's odd
I got the error when running "apt-get install libxft-dev:i386
libxft-dev:amd64" which gives the conflict error. If I run "dpkg
Control: tags -1 unreproducible
On 2018-11-29 10:16 -0600, Davy Durham wrote:
> Package: libxft-dev
> Version: 2.3.2-2
>
> Attempting to install libxft-dev for amd64 and i386 at the same time
> (or any other arch for that matter) gives an error that they
> conflict.
Not for m
Processing control commands:
> tags -1 unreproducible
Bug #915027 [libxft-dev] libxft-dev should be installable for multiple
architectures simultaneously
Added tag(s) unreproducible.
--
915027: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=915027
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact
Package: libxft-dev
Version: 2.3.2-2
Attempting to install libxft-dev for amd64 and i386 at the same time (or
any other arch for that matter) gives an error that they conflict. This
is because the "Package: libxft-dev"section of the debian/control file
does not contain "Multi-a
Your message dated Tue, 17 Apr 2018 17:15:43 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#884176: fixed in xft 2.3.2-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #884176,
regarding libxft-dev: Please mark the package Multi-Arch: same
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been
Hi,
Could this bug be fixed in Unstable, please?
Alternatively, if you would like, I am happy to prepare a NMU.
I don’t believe upstream will release another version (given the lack of
activity), so fixing outstanding bugs is ideal. In particular, the previous
maintainer bug (#889301) and swit
Your message dated Mon, 5 Feb 2018 15:38:05 +0100
with message-id <56babf10-9d75-e0f9-135b-47dff5afe...@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#843837: libxft-dev: Xft/Xft.h header incorrectly
includes ft2build.h
has caused the Debian Bug report #843837,
regarding libxft-dev: Xft/Xft.h
On 04/02/2018 14:05, Hugh McMaster wrote:
The freetype-2.8 API reference shows this #include usage. Look at the
documentation
provided with libfreetype6-dev in
/usr/share/doc/libfreetype6/documentation.html,
particulary Tutorial #1 and Example #1.
Freetype-2.9 (the most recent upstream versio
Hi Graham,
Sorry for the delayed reply.
On Wednesday, 31 January 2018 5:23 PM, Graham Inggs wrote:
> I saw this message in bug #887595 [1] and thought it would be relevant here:
>
> On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 11:56:38AM +, Hugh McMaster wrote:
>> Also note that the Freetype2 developers no longer
Hi Julien,
On Thu, 25 Jan 2018 09:07:51 +0100 Julien Cristau
wrote:
> >
> I get that it's important to you. That doesn't make it an important
> bug.
This bug blocks improvement in other many packages. So while this bug
is for sure unimportant for libxft alone,
it has s
Hi Oleksiy, Hugh
I saw this message in bug #887595 [1] and thought it would be relevant here:
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 11:56:38AM +, Hugh McMaster wrote:
> Also note that the Freetype2 developers no longer recommend using
> #include
> in source files (which was the intent of my patch). Th
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 wishlist
Bug #884176 [libxft-dev] libxft-dev: Please mark the package Multi-Arch: same
Severity set to 'wishlist' from 'important'
--
884176: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=884176
Debian Bug Tra
in this package blocks multi-arch
> support in
> libpango1.0-dev and libfontforge-dev. These packages, in turn, block
> multi-arch
> support in Wine (i.e. wine-development).
>
> Marking libxft-dev as Multi-Arch: same will benefit many package, including
> packages depending on
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 important
Bug #884176 [libxft-dev] libxft-dev: Please mark the package Multi-Arch: same
Severity set to 'important' from 'wishlist'
--
884176: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=884176
Debian Bug Tra
support in Wine (i.e. wine-development).
Marking libxft-dev as Multi-Arch: same will benefit many package, including
packages depending on libpango1.0-dev and libfontforge-dev. So fixing
this bug is important.
Dear Maintainer,
The attached debdiff is for an NMU for libxft-dev. It fixes #884176 and #843837.
Hugh
xft.debdiff
Description: xft.debdiff
Package: libxft-dev
Version: 2.3.2-1+b2
Severity: wishlist
Dear Maintainer,
The package libxft-dev is not currently multi-arch installable.
A comparison of the i386 and amd64 variants reveals no file conflicts.
Multi-arch support is needed for packages such as libfontforge-dev
and libpango1.0
Package: libxft-dev
Version: 2.3.2-1
Severity: normal
Tags: upstream
Dear Maintainer,
* What led up to the situation?
Tried to build Motif from sources.
* What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or
ineffective)?
Take Motif sources and run configure &&a
Your message dated Tue, 25 Jan 2011 12:17:00 +0100
with message-id <20110125111700.gc30...@radis.liafa.jussieu.fr>
and subject line Re: Bug#611074: libxft-dev: unable to install (Debian Testing)
has caused the Debian Bug report #611074,
regarding libxft-dev: unable to install (Debian Testi
Package: libxft-dev
Version: 2.1.14-2
Severity: grave
Tags: squeeze
Justification: renders package unusable
I am unable to install the package in Squeeze:
root@hstreibel:~# apt-get install libxft-dev
...
Some packages could not be installed.
...
The following packages have unmet dependencies
Your message dated Sat, 15 Jan 2011 01:39:57 +0100
with message-id <20110115003957.ga10...@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#375825: libxft-dev: xft-config --libs shouldn't
include -lX11 -lfreetype -lz -lfontconfig -lXrender -lX11
has caused the Debian Bug report #375825,
regarding
Your message dated Tue, 10 Jun 2008 14:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#389831: fixed in xft 2.1.12-3
has caused the Debian Bug report #389831,
regarding libxft-dev: pkg-config reports to much libraries for linking
to be marked as done.
This means th
Your message dated Tue, 10 Jun 2008 14:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#462262: fixed in xft 2.1.12-3
has caused the Debian Bug report #462262,
regarding libxft-dev: XftDrawRect buggy behaviour whens erver doesn't support
xrender
to be marked as
tag 375825 wontfix
kthxbye
On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 14:02:53 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> xft-config doesn't have a --static option, so it's kinda hard to know
> what unexporting these libs would break. People should use pkg-config
> instead, with the provided xft.pc file, which fixes this issu
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tag 375825 wontfix
Bug#375825: libxft-dev: xft-config --libs shouldn't include -lX11 -lfreetype
-lz -lfontconfig -lXrender -lX11
There were no tags set.
Tags added: wontfix
> kthxbye
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> forwarded 462262 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14232
Bug#462262: libxft-dev: XftDrawRect buggy behaviour whens erver doesn't support
xrender
Noted your statement that Bug has been forwarded to
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show
forwarded 462262 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14232
reassign 462262 libxft2
thank you
Marc Lehmann wrote:
> Package: libxft-dev
> Version: 2.1.8.2-8
> Severity: normal
>
>
> XftDrawRect works differently when the alpha channel is < 32768 depending
> on we
Package: libxft-dev
Version: 2.1.8.2-8
Severity: normal
XftDrawRect works differently when the alpha channel is < 32768 depending
on wether the server supports the xrender extension or not.
First of all, it is documented to "fill a solid rectangle". This is
the actual behaviour wh
Your message dated Wed, 12 Sep 2007 01:41:01 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#441822: libxft-dev: Apologies, false positive
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is n
Package: libxft-dev
Version: 2.1.12-2
Followup-For: Bug #441822
I believe the UTF-8 characters occur only in comments, which is not a
problem.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (700, 'testing'), (600, 'unstable')
Arch
Package: libxft-dev
Version: 2.1.12-2
Severity: minor
The following manpages in your package appear to be UTF-8 encoded:
/usr/share/man/man3/Xft.3.gz
According to Colin Watson, "With some exceptions for Far Eastern
languages, manual pages should not at present be encoded using UTF-8.
As
On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 05:24:20PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> [cc:ing vorlon as the author of 001_no_export_freetype.diff in the xft
> package]
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 02:12:25 +0200, Jörg Sommer wrote:
> > the site http://rerun.lefant.net/checklib/ pointed me to the problem that
> > my pa
[cc:ing vorlon as the author of 001_no_export_freetype.diff in the xft
package]
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 02:12:25 +0200, Jörg Sommer wrote:
> the site http://rerun.lefant.net/checklib/ pointed me to the problem that
> my package xjed defines too much dependencies:
> http://rerun.lefant.net/checkl
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 11:45:04 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> There are spurious dependencies in the output of xft-config --libs:
>
> -lXft -lX11 -lfreetype -lz -lfontconfig -lXrender -lX11
>
> -lfreetype -lz -lfontconfig -lXrender are _not_ needed in -libs (since
> the Xft _interface_ doesn'
system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--- Begin Message ---
Package: libxft-dev
Version: 2.1.8.2-2
Severity: normal
Missing file /usr/lib/libXft.la in 2.1.8.2-2 version of package, but in 2.1.7
it was.
It makes the package is unusable for building programs.
--
On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 13:34:49 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Were any of these symbols ever exposed in the published headers? If not,
> then I think it's pretty clear-cut that the symbols are internal and can be
> safely dropped without worrying about ABI breakage.
>
As far as I can see, they
pretty confident these symbols
> aren't being used anywhere. libXft 2.1.9 was released in June last
> year, one symbol was reexported in 2.1.12 in December [1], and the
> upstream bugzilla doesn't seem to mention further breakage, so it seems
> to me that upgrading to 2.1.12 sh
to
do.
So I checked all reverse dependencies in sid/main/ia64 on merkel, and it
seems that none of them use any of the removed symbols. Upstream didn't
bump the ABI either, so I guess they're pretty confident these symbols
aren't being used anywhere. libXft 2.1.9 was released in June l
Tag 'libXft-X11R7.0-2.1.8.2' created by David Nusinow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> at
1970-01-01 00:00 +0100
Changes since the dawn of time:
David Nusinow:
Vendor drop of proto and lib for 7.0
Update libs to 7.0 release with packaging
Grab latest from Ubuntu, which br
Tag 'libXft-2.1.11' created by Adam Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> at 2006-10-13
22:08 +0200
libXft 2.1.11
Changes since libXft-2.1.10:
Adam Jackson:
Bump to 2.1.11
---
configure.ac |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
---
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
Tag 'libXft-2.1.12' created by Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> at 2006-12-08
08:18 +0100
Xft 2.1.12
Changes since libXft-2.1.11:
Daniel Stone:
XftNameUnparse: re-export to public API (bug #8900)
bump to 2.1.12
---
configure.ac |2 +-
include/X11/
Tag 'libXft-2.1.10' created by Adam Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> at 2006-10-13
21:18 +0200
libXft 2.1.10
Changes since the dawn of time:
Adam Jackson:
Bump to 2.1.10
Alan Coopersmith:
Sync with Xft from xlibs CVS (2.1.7 plus man page updates from Branden
If
Package: libxft-dev
Version: 2.1.8.2-8
Severity: normal
Hi,
the site http://rerun.lefant.net/checklib/ pointed me to the problem that
my package xjed defines too much dependencies:
http://rerun.lefant.net/checklib/log.xjed_0.99.18-5.html I could track
down this problem to
% pkg-config --libs
Package: libxft-dev
Version: 2.1.8.2-8
Severity: minor
Hi,
There are spurious dependencies in the output of xft-config --libs:
-lXft -lX11 -lfreetype -lz -lfontconfig -lXrender -lX11
-lfreetype -lz -lfontconfig -lXrender are _not_ needed in -libs (since
the Xft _interface_ doesn't
trator, Debian Bugs database)
--- Begin Message ---
Package: x11-common
Version: 6.9.0.dfsg.1-4
Severity: normal
Upgrading package x11-common from version 6.9.0.dfsg.1-4 to version
6.9.0.dfsg.1-5 fails when package libxft-dev is also installed:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# apt-get install x11-common
R
quetando el reemplazo de x11-common ...
dpkg: error al procesar
/var/cache/apt/archives/x11-common_6.9.0.dfsg.1-6_all.deb (--unpack):
intentando sobreescribir `/usr/include/X11', que está también en el paquete
libxft-dev
System startup links for /etc/init.d/x11-common already exist.
Setting up
x
apt-get -t unstable install thunderbird
apt-get install ncftp
apt-get -t unstable install lesstif-dev libxft-dev
apt-get -t unstable install lesstif2-dev
apt-get -t unstable install libmotif3
apt-get -t unstable install wine wine-utils
apt-get install openwince-jtag
apt-get -b source pine
apt-ge
ital signature (GPG/PGP)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Source: xft
Source-Version: 2.1.8.2-8
We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
xft, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:
libxft-dev_2.1.8.2-8_i386.deb
to pool/main/x/xft/libxft-dev_2.1.
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 366488 libxft2
Bug#366488: foomatic-gui crashes on load - libXft
Bug reassigned from package `foomatic-gui' to `libxft2'.
> merge 366488 350113
Bug#350113: libxft2: "FT_GlyphSlot_Embolden" disappeared since version
Your message dated Tue, 02 May 2006 23:26:19 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#363316: libxft-dev should no longer depend on x-dev, but
on x11proto-core-dev
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem ha
Package: libxft-dev
Version: 2.1.8.2-6
Severity: minor
libxft-dev should no longer depend on x-dev, but on x11proto-core-dev,
as it is the last package to depend upon the x-dev transitional package
instead of x11proto-core-dev.
Regards
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
procesar
/var/cache/apt/archives/x11-common_6.9.0.dfsg.1-6_all.deb (--unpack):
intentando sobreescribir `/usr/include/X11', que está también en el paquete
libxft-dev
System startup links for /etc/init.d/x11-common already exist.
Setting up X server socket directory /tmp/.X11-unix...done.
Setti
Package: libxft-dev
Version: 2.1.8.2-5.1
Followup-For: Bug #358254
Preparing to replace libxft-dev 2.1.8.2-3 (using
.../libxft-dev_2.1.8.2-5.1_amd64.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement libxft-dev ...
dpkg: warning - unable to delete old directory `/usr/include/X11/Xft':
Directory not empty
Prep
Package: libxft-dev
Version: 2.1.8.2-3
Followup-For: Bug #358254
(Reading database ... 114257 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to replace x11-common 6.9.0.dfsg.1-4 (using
.../x11-common_6.9.0.dfsg. 1-5_all.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement x11-common ...
dpkg: error processing
) ...
Spacchetto il sostituto di x11-common ...
dpkg: errore processando
/var/cache/apt/archives/x11-common_6.9.0.dfsg.1-5_all.deb (--install):
tentata sovrascrittura di `/usr/include/X11', che si trova anche nel
pacchetto libxft-dev
System startup links for /etc/init.d/x11-common already
/x11-common_6.9.0.dfsg.1-5_all.deb
(--unpack):
trying to overwrite `/usr/include/X11', which is also in package
libxft-dev
System startup links for /etc/init.d/x11-common already exist.
Setting up X server socket directory /tmp/.X11-unix...done.
Setting up ICE socket directory /tmp/.ICE-unix..
Hi,
On Friday, March 24, 2006 12:45 AM, Otavio Salvador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I had problem upgrading some machines that runs sid here. Looks like
> x11-common needs to provide libxft-dev. I was upgrading to x11 -5
> packages.
This was actually a bug
acking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--- Begin Message ---
Package: libxft-dev
Version: 2.1.8.2-5
Severity: important
*** Please type your report below this line ***
libxft-dev does no install a link from /usr/X11R6/include/X11/Xft to
/usr/X11R6/include/Xft, which
Package: libxft-dev
Version: 2.1.8.2-5
Severity: serious
Followup-For: Bug #358578
I'm raising severity because it makes other packages FTBFS.
Due to the lack of the link, a whole lot of packages like firefox,
xulrunner and probably many others just FTBFS.
Please fix that quickly.
Thanks
Hello,
I had problem upgrading some machines that runs sid here. Looks like
x11-common needs to provide libxft-dev. I was upgrading to x11 -5
packages.
Thanks in advance,
--
O T A V I OS A L V A D O R
-
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] UIN
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 358629 libxft-dev
Bug#358629: x11-common file conflist with libxft-dev
Bug reassigned from package `x11-common' to `libxft-dev'.
> close 358629 2.1.8.2-4
Bug#358629: x11-common file conflist with libxft-dev
'close
reassign 358629 libxft-dev
close 358629 2.1.8.2-4
merge 358629 358439
thanks
Bryan Donlan wrote, Thursday, March 23, 2006 4:02 PM
> Upgrade of x11-common to 6.9.0.dfsg.1-5 fails with:
> Preparing to replace x11-common 6.9.0.dfsg.1-4 (using
.../x11-common_6.9.0.dfsg.1-5_all.deb) ...
>
/archives/x11-common_6.9.0.dfsg.1-5_all.deb (--unpack):
trying to overwrite `/usr/include/X11', which is also in package libxft-dev
System startup links for /etc/init.d/x11-common already exist.
libxft-dev has version:
ii libxft-dev 2.1.8.2-3 FreeType-based font drawing library for
Package: libxft-dev
Version: 2.1.8.2-5
Severity: important
*** Please type your report below this line ***
libxft-dev does no install a link from /usr/X11R6/include/X11/Xft to
/usr/X11R6/include/Xft, which causes configure script to not found
the Xft.h and XftCompat.h and thus not enabling XFT
Your message dated Thu, 23 Mar 2006 10:07:35 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line conflict with libxft-dev
has caused the attached Bug report 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 no
Package: x11-common
Version: 6.9.0.dfsg.1-5
Followup-For: Bug #358357
Hmm, this seems to be a duplicate of #358254, which is fixed by
xft (2.1.8.2-4) unstable; urgency=low
.
* Make libxft-dev pre-depend on x11-common so as to make sure that
the symlink for /usr/include/X11 is already
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.15
> reassign 358370 libxft-dev
Bug#358370: x11-common: Error while upgrading to version 6.9.0.dfsg.1-5
Bug reassigned from package `x11-common' to `libxft-dev'.
> clo
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.15
> reassign 358439 libxft-dev
Bug#358439: x11-common should replace: libxft-dev
Bug reassigned from package `x11-common' to `libxft-dev'.
> close 358439 2.1.8.
):
trying to overwrite `/usr/include/X11', which is also in package libxft-dev
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Ke
> Package: x11-common
> Version: 6.9.0.dfsg.1-4
> Severity: important
>
>
> Unpacking replacement x11-common ...
> dpkg: error processing
> /var/cache/apt/archives/x11-common_6.9.0.dfsg.1-5_all.deb (--unpack):
> trying to overwrite `/usr/include/X11', which is
Package: x11-common
Version: 6.9.0.dfsg.1-4
Severity: important
Unpacking replacement x11-common ...
dpkg: error processing
/var/cache/apt/archives/x11-common_6.9.0.dfsg.1-5_all.deb (--unpack):
trying to overwrite `/usr/include/X11', which is also in package libxft-dev
-- System Inform
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.15
> reassign 358331 libxft-dev
Bug#358331: x11-common: uninstalable - trying to overwrite /usr/include/X11
Bug reassigned from package `x11-common' to `libxft-dev'.
Package: x11-common
Version: 6.9.0.dfsg.1-4
Severity: normal
Upgrading package x11-common from version 6.9.0.dfsg.1-4 to version
6.9.0.dfsg.1-5 fails when package libxft-dev is also installed:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# apt-get install x11-common
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.15
> reassign 358308 libxft-dev
Bug#358308: x11-common collides with libxft-dev (/usr/include/X11)
Bug reassigned from package `x11-common' to `libxft-dev'.
>
End o
system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--- Begin Message ---
Package: x11-common
Version: 6.9.0.dfsg.1-4
Severity: grave
x11-common is currently uninstallable resp. can't be upgraded to
6.9.0.dfsg.1-5 because it conflicts with libxft-dev. The error
message is:
Unpacking repl
error processing
/var/cache/apt/archives/x11-common_6.9.0.dfsg.1-4_all.deb (--unpack):
trying to overwrite `/usr/include/X11', which is also in package
libxft-dev
System startup links for /etc/init.d/x11-common already exist.
Setting up X server socket directory /tmp/.X11-unix...done.
Setting up
Error indicates that
x11-common is attempting to overwrite a file that is also in package
libxft-dev. apt-get output is shown below.
Preparing to replace x11-common 6.9.0.dfsg.1-4 (using
.../x11-common_6.9.0.dfsg.1-5_all.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement x11-common ...
dpkg: error processing
/var/cac
Package: x11-common
Version: 6.9.0.dfsg.1-4
Severity: grave
x11-common is currently uninstallable resp. can't be upgraded to
6.9.0.dfsg.1-5 because it conflicts with libxft-dev. The error
message is:
Unpacking replacement x11-common ...
dpkg: error processing
/var/cache/apt/archive
Package: libxft-dev
Version: 2.1.8.2-3
Followup-For: Bug #350298
I experience this same bug as follows on sid+experimental.
My two conflicting packages are versioned as follows:
libxft-dev version 2.1.8.2-3
x11-common version 6.9.0.dfsg.1-5
Therefore, I can confirm the veracity of the earlier
package
libxft-dev. apt-get output is shown below.
Preparing to replace x11-common 6.9.0.dfsg.1-4 (using
.../x11-common_6.9.0.dfsg.1-5_all.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement x11-common ...
dpkg: error processing
/var/cache/apt/archives/x11-common_6.9.0.dfsg.1-5_all.deb (--unpack):
trying to
Author: dnusinow
Date: 2006-02-18 15:21:03 -0500 (Sat, 18 Feb 2006)
New Revision: 1220
Added:
branches/modular/lib/libXft-X11R7.0-2.1.8.2/debian/patches/002_no_xproto_dep.diff
Modified:
branches/modular/lib/libXft-X11R7.0-2.1.8.2/debian/changelog
branches/modular/lib/libXft-X11R7.0
cii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Causing FTBFS is a grave bug.
No, it isn't; a FTBFS is a serious bug, on whichever package is
*responsible* for the failure. Since the libxft-dev package has
deliberately dropped libXft.la (which in the long term
Package: libxft-dev
Version: 2.1.8.2-2
Severity: normal
Missing file /usr/lib/libXft.la in 2.1.8.2-2 version of package, but in 2.1.7
it was.
It makes the package is unusable for building programs.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers testing
APT policy
(--unpack):
trying to overwrite `/usr/include/X11', which is also in package
libxft-dev
System startup links for /etc/init.d/x11-common already exist.
Setting up X server socket directory /tmp/.X11-unix...done.
Setting up ICE socket directory /tmp/.ICE-unix...done.
Errors were encountered
t;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
id 1F1PBo-Eq-FV; Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:30:32 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject
0800 (PST)
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 02:44:28 -0800
From: Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: libxft-dev: please do not export unnecessary libraries in xft.pc
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
tags 349678 + pending
thanks
On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 03:30:32PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> Package: libxft-dev
> Version: 2.1.8.2-1
> Severity: critical
> Justification: breaks unrelated software
>
> The file /usr/lib/pkgconfig/xft.pc says xft requires xproto, which is
> av
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 349678 + pending
Bug#349678: libxft-dev: pkg-config file says requires xproto that don't exist
There were no tags set.
Tags added: pending
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug trac
t;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
id 1F1PBo-Eq-FV; Tue, 24 Jan 2006 15:30:32 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: libxft-dev
Package: libxft-dev
Version: 2.1.8.2-1
Severity: critical
Justification: breaks unrelated software
The file /usr/lib/pkgconfig/xft.pc says xft requires xproto, which is
available in no package, as stated by apt-file.
Even if it existed, there should be a dependency to the dev package
holding it
On Sun, 2006-01-22 at 14:36 -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
>
> The mesa NMU will go in shortly, and after that I need to figure out
> exactly how to handle the transition to FHS compliance. I'm not entirely
> sure I'm happy with how Daniel did it (although I've yet to look at it
> closely). I'm goin
0800 (PST)
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 02:44:28 -0800
From: Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: libxft-dev: please do not export unnecessary libraries in xft.pc
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
Author: dnusinow
Date: 2006-01-22 22:09:34 -0500 (Sun, 22 Jan 2006)
New Revision: 1110
Modified:
branches/modular/lib/libXft-X11R7.0-2.1.8.2/debian/changelog
branches/modular/lib/libXft-X11R7.0-2.1.8.2/debian/control
Log:
* Add build-dep on quilt
* Set maintainer and uploaders
Modified
Author: dnusinow
Date: 2006-01-22 22:07:34 -0500 (Sun, 22 Jan 2006)
New Revision: 1109
Modified:
branches/modular/lib/libXft-X11R7.0-2.1.8.2/debian/changelog
branches/modular/lib/libXft-X11R7.0-2.1.8.2/debian/control
branches/modular/lib/libXft-X11R7.0-2.1.8.2/debian/libxft-dev.install
On Sun, Jan 22, 2006 at 03:05:48PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> But libxft2 is already split out and installed in /usr/lib, so it should be
> just a simple matter of packaging the new upstream version in order to fix
> this particular one? Would an NMU be welcome here, or could some other
> memb
1 - 100 of 160 matches
Mail list logo
