|
Home > Archive > Debian Developers > May 2005 > unrar version confusion
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
unrar version confusion
|
|
| Nico Golde 2005-05-20, 6:04 pm |
| Hi,
I had a look on the unrar package and the version number
confuses me a little bit.
On http://packages.qa.debian.org/u/unrar.html you can see
the past uploads and what confuses me is:
# [2004-07-05] Accepted 1:0.0.1-1 in unstable (low) (Niklas Vainio)
# [2004-06-24] Accepted 3.3.6-2 in unstable (low) (Chris Anderson)
# [2004-03-09] Accepted 3.3.6-1 in unstable (low) (Petr Cech)
Why is the latest version in debian lower than the one before?
Regards Nico
--
Nico Golde - 310777820@ICQ | GPG: 1024D/73647CFF
http://www.ngolde.de | http://www.muttng.org | http://grml.org
VIM has two modes - the one in which it beeps
and the one in which it doesn't -- encrypted mail preferred
| |
| Roberto C. Sanchez 2005-05-20, 6:04 pm |
| Quoting Nico Golde <nico@ngolde.de>:
> Hi,
> I had a look on the unrar package and the version number
> confuses me a little bit.
> On http://packages.qa.debian.org/u/unrar.html you can see
> the past uploads and what confuses me is:
> # [2004-07-05] Accepted 1:0.0.1-1 in unstable (low) (Niklas Vainio)
> # [2004-06-24] Accepted 3.3.6-2 in unstable (low) (Chris Anderson)
> # [2004-03-09] Accepted 3.3.6-1 in unstable (low) (Petr Cech)
>
> Why is the latest version in debian lower than the one before?
> Regards Nico
Becuase it is, in fact, a different program. The higher numbered releases
are of a non-free version of unrar. The newer releases are of a free version
that is going into main.
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~sanchezr
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Nico Golde 2005-05-20, 6:04 pm |
| Hello Roberto,
* Roberto C. Sanchez <roberto@familiasanchez.net> [2005-05-20 21:48]:
> Quoting Nico Golde <nico@ngolde.de>:
>
>
> Becuase it is, in fact, a different program. The higher numbered releases
> are of a non-free version of unrar. The newer releases are of a free
> version
> that is going into main.
Ah ok thats good news.
Regards and thanks
Nico
--
Nico Golde - 310777820@ICQ | GPG: 1024D/73647CFF
http://www.ngolde.de | http://www.muttng.org | http://grml.org
VIM has two modes - the one in which it beeps
and the one in which it doesn't -- encrypted mail preferred
| |
| Rudi Effe 2005-05-20, 6:04 pm |
| Am Freitag, 20. Mai 2005 21:49 schrieb Nico Golde:
> Ah ok thats good news.
> Regards and thanks
> Nico
the unfree packages have been renamed to unrar-nonfree. the unrar
package in main is free - but does not support some current rar
features.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Steinar H. Gunderson 2005-05-20, 6:04 pm |
| On Fri, May 20, 2005 at 09:55:08PM +0200, Rudi Effe wrote:
> the unfree packages have been renamed to unrar-nonfree. the unrar
> package in main is free - but does not support some current rar
> features.
"Some current rar features" is an understatement -- it doesn't support RAR
3.x archives at all (close to nobody makes new RAR 2.x archives nowadays).
/* Steinar */
--
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Wouter Verhelst 2005-05-20, 8:49 pm |
| On Fri, May 20, 2005 at 03:45:10PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> Quoting Nico Golde <nico@ngolde.de>:
>
> Becuase it is, in fact, a different program. The higher numbered releases
> are of a non-free version of unrar. The newer releases are of a free
> version
> that is going into main.
Then the new program should still have a higher version number, to allow
people who currently use the non-free program to upgrade to the free
program.
If the non-free program has more features than the free program,
however, then it should probably have a different name.
--
The amount of time between slipping on the peel and landing on the
pavement is precisely one bananosecond
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Russ Allbery 2005-05-20, 8:49 pm |
| Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> writes:
> On Fri, May 20, 2005 at 03:45:10PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Then the new program should still have a higher version number, to allow
> people who currently use the non-free program to upgrade to the free
> program.
That's why there's the 1: there to increase the epoch.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Roberto C. Sanchez 2005-05-21, 5:49 pm |
| Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Repairing this issue by simply renaming the non-free package back to
> unrar and giving the free program a different name should be pretty
> straightforward and doable for sarge.
>
Package unrar
* stable (utils): Unarchiver for .rar files [non-free]
2.71-1: alpha arm i386 powerpc sparc
* unstable (utils): Unarchiver for .rar files
1:0.0.1-1: alpha amd64 arm hppa hurd-i386 i386 ia64 m68k mips
mipsel powerpc s390 sparc
Package unrar-nonfree
* unstable (utils): Unarchiver for .rar files (non-free version)
[non-free]
3.4.3-1: arm hppa i386 ia64 m68k powerpc s390 sparc
3.3.6-2: alpha mips mipsel
It is not even Sarge. That sort of makes it a non-issue for the
moment.
I guess the more pressing issue is what will happen to people that have
it installed under Woody and then upgrade to Sarge and find that the
package no longer exists?
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~sanchezr
| |
| Adrian Bunk 2005-05-21, 5:49 pm |
| On Fri, May 20, 2005 at 10:58:52PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Fri, May 20, 2005 at 03:45:10PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
>
> Then the new program should still have a higher version number, to allow
> people who currently use the non-free program to upgrade to the free
> program.
>
> If the non-free program has more features than the free program,
> however, then it should probably have a different name.
The non-free program has more features, and I'm therefore still not a
fan of the fact that the free version got the name of the non-free
version while the non-free version was renamed.
I don't believe it's a good way to convince people of the superiority of
free software by automatically replacing non-free software with inferior
free software on upgrades...
Why didn't the non-free program simply keep it's name with the free
program getting a different name?
That the free unrar is a one year old version 0.0.1 (and there doesn't
seem to be any more recent version) doesn't make it better...
Repairing this issue by simply renaming the non-free package back to
unrar and giving the free program a different name should be pretty
straightforward and doable for sarge.
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Adrian Bunk 2005-05-21, 5:49 pm |
| On Sat, May 21, 2005 at 06:24:50PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Package unrar
>
> * stable (utils): Unarchiver for .rar files [non-free]
> 2.71-1: alpha arm i386 powerpc sparc
> * unstable (utils): Unarchiver for .rar files
> 1:0.0.1-1: alpha amd64 arm hppa hurd-i386 i386 ia64 m68k mips
> mipsel powerpc s390 sparc
>
> Package unrar-nonfree
>
> * unstable (utils): Unarchiver for .rar files (non-free version)
> [non-free]
> 3.4.3-1: arm hppa i386 ia64 m68k powerpc s390 sparc
> 3.3.6-2: alpha mips mipsel
>
> It is not even Sarge. That sort of makes it a non-issue for the
> moment.
Which is a result of the renaming of the non-free unrar...
> I guess the more pressing issue is what will happen to people that have
> it installed under Woody and then upgrade to Sarge and find that the
> package no longer exists?
- rename the unrar-nonfree package back to unrar
- rename the free unnrar package to unrar-free (it can even be left out
of sarge (version 0.0.1 that is the one year old latest upstream
version...))
- get the non-free package that is again named unrar back into sarge
> -Roberto
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Steve Langasek 2005-05-22, 2:47 am |
| On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 12:20:47AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Fri, May 20, 2005 at 10:58:52PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
> The non-free program has more features, and I'm therefore still not a
> fan of the fact that the free version got the name of the non-free
> version while the non-free version was renamed.
> I don't believe it's a good way to convince people of the superiority of
> free software by automatically replacing non-free software with inferior
> free software on upgrades...
> Why didn't the non-free program simply keep it's name with the free
> program getting a different name?
> That the free unrar is a one year old version 0.0.1 (and there doesn't
> seem to be any more recent version) doesn't make it better...
> Repairing this issue by simply renaming the non-free package back to
> unrar and giving the free program a different name should be pretty
> straightforward and doable for sarge.
$ grep-excuses unrar
unrar (- to 1:0.0.1-1)
Maintainer: Niklas Vainio
320 days old (needed 10 days)
Not touching package, as requested by freeze (contact debian-release ifupdate is needed)
unrar (source, alpha, arm, hppa, i386, ia64, m68k, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc) is buggy! (3 > 0)
Not considered
$ grep-excuses unrar-nonfree
unrar-nonfree (- to 3.4.3-1)
Maintainer: Chris Anderson
Section: non-free/utils
171 days old (needed 10 days)
Not touching package, as requested by freeze (contact debian-release ifupdate is needed)
out of date on alpha: unrar-nonfree (from 3.3.6-2)
out of date on mips: unrar-nonfree (from 3.3.6-2)
out of date on mipsel: unrar-nonfree (from 3.3.6-2)
unrar-nonfree (source, alpha, arm, hppa, i386, ia64, m68k, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc) is buggy! (1 > 0)
Not considered
$
Not really an issue for sarge anyway...
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
| |
| Adrian Bunk 2005-05-22, 7:47 am |
| On Sat, May 21, 2005 at 08:33:20PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 12:20:47AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>...
>
>...
> $ grep-excuses unrar-nonfree
> unrar-nonfree (- to 3.4.3-1)
> Maintainer: Chris Anderson
> Section: non-free/utils
> 171 days old (needed 10 days)
> Not touching package, as requested by freeze (contact debian-release if update is needed)
> out of date on alpha: unrar-nonfree (from 3.3.6-2)
> out of date on mips: unrar-nonfree (from 3.3.6-2)
> out of date on mipsel: unrar-nonfree (from 3.3.6-2)
> unrar-nonfree (source, alpha, arm, hppa, i386, ia64, m68k, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc) is buggy! (1 > 0)
> Not considered
> $
>
> Not really an issue for sarge anyway...
The RC bug in unrar-nonfree is only a small licence clarification issue
that is already resolved in the latest upstream version of
unrar-nonfree.
> Steve Langasek
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Wouter Verhelst 2005-05-22, 7:47 am |
| On Fri, May 20, 2005 at 05:59:36PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> writes:
>
> That's why there's the 1: there to increase the epoch.
Oh, indeed, sorry. I misread and thought the original, non-free, rar had
an epoch of 3.
--
The amount of time between slipping on the peel and landing on the
pavement is precisely one bananosecond
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Jeroen van Wolffelaar 2005-05-22, 5:49 pm |
| On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 12:41:11AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> - rename the unrar-nonfree package back to unrar
> - rename the free unnrar package to unrar-free (it can even be left out
> of sarge (version 0.0.1 that is the one year old latest upstream
> version...))
> - get the non-free package that is again named unrar back into sarge
I've done the first point, neglecting the second point for now, and the
third point is an RM decision.
My rationale to do this, is:
- woody shipped with a non-free unrar named 'unrar', and it worked
- the free version is not functionally equivalent yet, of the .rar files
in the wild, I couldn't actually find a single one that was
unpackeable with the free unrar.
- So, it's too late now to have sarge ship with a free alternative,
because development of that one simply hasn't reached a functionally
(nearly-?) equivalent version. For etch, let's see, but for sarge,
let's just maintain the situation as it was in woody: a non-free
'unrar' for people not objecting to non-free who want to unrar files.
Once the free unrar matured enough, it can probably ultimately replace
unrar (again), but until that time, I really do believe the free unrar
should be named differently until that point is reached. I offer my
assistance to get this happening again because of what I've done to
unstable at the moment.
RMs, please review unrar-nonfree 1:3.5.2-0.1, restoring a new version of
the unrar that was in woody to sarge.
Thanks,
--Jeroen
--
Jeroen van Wolffelaar
Jeroen@wolffelaar.nl (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357)
http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Niklas Vainio 2005-05-22, 5:49 pm |
| I'm the (previous) maintainer of unrar. Jose Carlos Medeiros has offered to
adopt it.
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 02:36:50PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 12:41:11AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
I support your suggestions of renaming. I also think there should be an
unrar implementation in the next Debian stable. Currently there is none.
(The Debian project distributes a non-free unrar from its servers, but it's
not part of Debian.)
I've kept unrar intentionally out of sarge because of incompability
problems. Changing the package name and fixing rest of the bugs (I've sent
some patches) would allow it go in.
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Once the free unrar matured enough, it can probably ultimately replace
> unrar (again), but until that time, I really do believe the free unrar
> should be named differently until that point is reached. I offer my
> assistance to get this happening again because of what I've done to
> unstable at the moment.
Jose, have you got any comments? Have you got a sponsor? Jeroen, could you
sponsor Jose if needed?
--
Niklas Vainio <niklas.vainio@iki.fi>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Jeroen van Wolffelaar 2005-05-23, 6:00 pm |
| On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 11:04:07AM -0300, Jose Carlos do Nascimento wrote:
> Hi, all
>
> I read all comments, but I didnt understood what I need to do.
> Ola Lundqvist is my sponsor, but if Jeroen or other could upload , I
> will be grateful, because Ola is very busyed.
>
> Can I have 2 sponsors ?
You can have 900 if you can find 900 people replying to your requests
still having a key in the keyring  .
Each upload needs one sponsor, it's strongly adviseable to stick with
one sponsor per package though, because that reduces work for the
sponsor and gets you consistency in comments. But it's not needed.
For here, I'd be happy if Ola could sponsor you, regardless, no new
upload needed before sarge releases.
--Jeroen
--
Jeroen van Wolffelaar
Jeroen@wolffelaar.nl (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357)
http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Jose Carlos do Nascimento 2005-05-23, 6:00 pm |
| Hi, all
I read all comments, but I didnt understood what I need to do.
Ola Lundqvist is my sponsor, but if Jeroen or other could upload , I
will be grateful, because Ola is very busyed.
Can I have 2 sponsors ?
[]
Jose Carlos
>I'm the (previous) maintainer of unrar. Jose Carlos Medeiros has offered to
>adopt it.
>
>On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 02:36:50PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
>
>
>
>I support your suggestions of renaming. I also think there should be an
>unrar implementation in the next Debian stable. Currently there is none.
>(The Debian project distributes a non-free unrar from its servers, but it's
>not part of Debian.)
>
>I've kept unrar intentionally out of sarge because of incompability
>problems. Changing the package name and fixing rest of the bugs (I've sent
>some patches) would allow it go in.
>
>
>
>
>Jose, have you got any comments? Have you got a sponsor? Jeroen, could you
>sponsor Jose if needed?
>
>
>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Jose Carlos do Nascimento 2005-05-23, 6:00 pm |
|
>
>You can have 900 if you can find 900 people replying to your requests
>still having a key in the keyring .
>
>Each upload needs one sponsor, it's strongly adviseable to stick with
>one sponsor per package though, because that reduces work for the
>sponsor and gets you consistency in comments. But it's not needed.
>
>For here, I'd be happy if Ola could sponsor you, regardless, no new
>upload needed before sarge releases.
>
>--Jeroen
>
>
>
Ah, ok
Its very good,, but is very difficult to find sponsors, because they
always are very busy. 
Well,, now Im waiting for Sarge release, and after I will send my
packages to Ola.
About unrar, what need I to do ? did I adopt what version of unrar ?
Jose Carlos
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Steve Langasek 2005-05-27, 7:58 am |
| On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 02:36:50PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 12:41:11AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> I've done the first point, neglecting the second point for now, and the
> third point is an RM decision.
> My rationale to do this, is:
> - woody shipped with a non-free unrar named 'unrar', and it worked
> - the free version is not functionally equivalent yet, of the .rar files
> in the wild, I couldn't actually find a single one that was
> unpackeable with the free unrar.
> - So, it's too late now to have sarge ship with a free alternative,
> because development of that one simply hasn't reached a functionally
> (nearly-?) equivalent version. For etch, let's see, but for sarge,
> let's just maintain the situation as it was in woody: a non-free
> 'unrar' for people not objecting to non-free who want to unrar files.
> Once the free unrar matured enough, it can probably ultimately replace
> unrar (again), but until that time, I really do believe the free unrar
> should be named differently until that point is reached. I offer my
> assistance to get this happening again because of what I've done to
> unstable at the moment.
> RMs, please review unrar-nonfree 1:3.5.2-0.1, restoring a new version of
> the unrar that was in woody to sarge.
Approved.
I had rather hoped to see some feedback from the current unrar-nonfree
maintainer about this package name change, though. Chris, is this NMUed
change ok with you?
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
| |
| Chris Anderson 2005-05-27, 5:57 pm |
|
On 5/27/05 9:16 AM, "Steve Langasek" <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:
> On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 02:36:50PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Approved.
>
> I had rather hoped to see some feedback from the current unrar-nonfree
> maintainer about this package name change, though. Chris, is this NMUed
> change ok with you?
Sorry about the delay. I spoke to Jeroen in irc when the NMU first happened
and I appreciate the changes. As I discussed with him, I had been
considering requesting a similar change but hadn't determined how to go
about doing it (I've also been extremely busy with personal issues).
Everything he proposed and that you've discussed in the bug/thread is fine
with me.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Michelle Konzack 2005-05-28, 7:48 am |
| Am 2005-05-22 14:36:50, schrieb Jeroen van Wolffelaar:
> My rationale to do this, is:
>
> - woody shipped with a non-free unrar named 'unrar', and it worked
OK.
> - the free version is not functionally equivalent yet, of the .rar files
> in the wild, I couldn't actually find a single one that was
> unpackeable with the free unrar.
Me too :-)
> - So, it's too late now to have sarge ship with a free alternative,
> because development of that one simply hasn't reached a functionally
> (nearly-?) equivalent version. For etch, let's see, but for sarge,
> let's just maintain the situation as it was in woody: a non-free
> 'unrar' for people not objecting to non-free who want to unrar files.
Why not ship SARGE with unrar-nonfree and provide a
virtualpackage "unrar" which point to the renamed one ?
> Once the free unrar matured enough, it can probably ultimately replace
Maybe in ETCH.
> unrar (again), but until that time, I really do believe the free unrar
SARGE $USER are using now "unrar-nonfree" and in
ETCH we can remove the virtual-package "unrar".
> Thanks,
> --Jeroen
Greetings
Michelle
--
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
Michelle Konzack Apt. 917 ICQ #328449886
50, rue de Soultz MSM LinuxMichi
0033/3/88452356 67100 Strasbourg/France IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)
| |
| Daniel Baumann 2005-05-28, 5:49 pm |
| Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Why not ship SARGE with unrar-nonfree and provide a
> virtualpackage "unrar" which point to the renamed one ?
you've never heard about Provides, isn't it?
--
Address: Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562 Biberist
Email: daniel.baumann@panthera-systems.net
Internet: http://people.panthera-systems.net/~daniel-baumann/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Wouter Verhelst 2005-05-29, 2:48 am |
| On Sat, May 28, 2005 at 01:34:34PM +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote:
[...]
> Why not ship SARGE with unrar-nonfree and provide a
[...]
> Maybe in ETCH.
[...]
> SARGE $USER are using now "unrar-nonfree" and in
[...]
> ETCH we can remove the virtual-package "unrar".
[...]
It's Sarge, and Etch. Please don't yell at our releases.
--
The amount of time between slipping on the peel and landing on the
pavement is precisely one bananosecond
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
|
|
|
|
|