> On Sun, Feb 09, 2014 at 02:21:46AM +0100, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 11:25:48AM +0100, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
>>> On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Moritz Mühlenhoff
>>> <
j...@inutil.org> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> lcms needs to go for jessie in favour of lcms2 (#717928).
>>>> (liblcms1-dev -> liblcms2-dev) The maintainer seems MIA, so I'm
>>>> going ahead. Below is a dd-list of affected packages. This is a
>>>> headsup as recommended by policy, I'll file bugs in a few weeks.
>>>
>>> Could you note that lcms2 have some ABI problem, and it seems we
>>> should do a transition in newer version. See
>>>
http://upstream-tracker.org/versions/lcms.html and #701993.
>>>
>>> So maybe we should made directly the transition to the new ABI ?
>>
>> Sorry for the late reply. I wouldn't hold my breath for the
>> transition to the new ABI, so moving from lcms1 to lcms2 is probably
>> more important for now.
>
> I have uploaded lcms2 2.5 to delayed/7 yesterday. After consulting
> with the maintainer, I have added myself as co-maintainer.