@bhavi:
Just a small comment here as I was taking a look at this bug simultaneously
as Graham.
What is your opinion on the below change from -1 that still exists in the
latest debian package
* B-D on libtiff-dev rather than libtiff5-dev | libtiff-dev
Sorry, I missed your comment. I
Not particularly but when fetching sources through d/control always the
buildd looks at the first package before the or and if its not found
fetches the second one and since libtiff5 isnt avalable the previous
uploader generalised the change and should have been tracked in debian
too I guess
Sorry I meant libtiff is no longer there since its a virtual package now
and the change would have been other way around :-)
So the sync is fine :)
Regards
Bhavi
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
** Changed in: ufraw (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) = Graham Inggs (ginggs)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1395427
Title:
Sync ufraw 0.20-1 (universe) from Debian unstable
Just a small comment here as I was taking a look at this bug
simultaneously as Graham.
What is your opinion on the below change from -1 that still exists in
the latest debian package
* B-D on libtiff-dev rather than libtiff5-dev | libtiff-dev
Regards
Bhavi
--
You received this bug
Is anything damaged by that change?
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Bhavani Shankar right2bshan...@gmail.com
wrote:
Just a small comment here as I was taking a look at this bug
simultaneously as Graham.
What is your opinion on the below change from -1 that still exists in
the latest debian
This bug was fixed in the package ufraw - 0.20-1
Sponsored for Jackson Doak (noskcaj)
---
ufraw (0.20-1) unstable; urgency=low
* New upstream version.
* Supports Fuji X-Trans filters (closes: #729026)
-- Hubert Chathi uho...@debian.org Tue, 14 Oct 2014 10:27:30 -0400
ufraw
