Please sync photoprint (0.3.6-2) from Debian unstable (main)

Bug #177443 reported by John Carlyle-Clarke
6
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
photoprint (Debian)
Fix Released
Unknown
photoprint (Ubuntu)
Fix Released
Wishlist
Unassigned

Bug Description

As the title says, the application sets up paths and has a dialog to select colour profiles, but by default show errors on each entry because it cannot find the colour profile files. Installing the icc-profiles package corrects this. While the application does appear to function without this package, part of its functionality is evidently disabled or restricted, and it does show potentially confusing warning/error messages to the user.

Revision history for this message
Luca Falavigna (dktrkranz) wrote :

Adding it to Recommends should be enough, then. Do you agree?

Revision history for this message
John Carlyle-Clarke (jpcc) wrote :

I'm not too aware of the standards and conventions there, but it sounds very reasonable, since the program will operate without it, but with reduced functionality.

Revision history for this message
Nicolas Valcarcel (nvalcarcel) wrote :

I can't reproduce it, i have installed photoprint without icc-profiles, imported a photo, an clicked on: Image - Set Colour Profile... but i don't get any error, only one saying "please select a photo" when i have none selected. Are these the correct steps to reproduce it?

Changed in photoprint:
assignee: nobody → dcordero
status: New → In Progress
Revision history for this message
David Cordero (david.cordero) wrote :

Depends:
This declares an absolute dependency. A package will not be configured unless all of the packages listed in its Depends field have been correctly configured.

From Debian-policy

Changed in photoprint:
assignee: dcordero → nobody
status: In Progress → Confirmed
Changed in photoprint:
assignee: nobody → dcordero
status: Confirmed → In Progress
Revision history for this message
David Cordero (david.cordero) wrote :

There are a new version of photoprint in Debian. Here the diff.gz with the merged

Changed in photoprint:
assignee: dcordero → nobody
status: In Progress → Confirmed
Revision history for this message
Nicolas Valcarcel (nvalcarcel) wrote :

Does the new version fixes this bug? If no it should be on a different bug report for the merge and upload the debdiff of the merge to that bug, not the diff.gz here.

Why have you edited the debian/rules and it's not on the changelog?

Revision history for this message
David Cordero (david.cordero) wrote :

In the first time, i sent here a .debdiff that fix this bug.

Then i saw that there is a new version for photoprint in Debian, although that new version don't fix this bug.

So, I got this new version from Debian, I applied my changes for fix this bug, and I sent here the diff.gz and I sent to debian the bug with the patch.

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=463826

What is not correct in this process?

It's OK, in the patch that I sent in the first time I touched debian/rules without Changelog entry, mistake.

But in the .diff.gz this same change was done by Debian maintainer and it was indicated in changelog.

I'm lost :/

Revision history for this message
David Cordero (david.cordero) wrote :

The .debdiff with the changelog entries

Revision history for this message
Nicolas Valcarcel (nvalcarcel) wrote :

The process for the merges (that's what you are doing in this case) is described on the wiki [1] and as said there, what you need to send is a debdiff of the old ubuntu against the new ubuntu (the debian version with the ubuntu changes applied). In this particular case you need ( want ? ) to add the changes that solves this bug, so the process must be merge the package -> patch the bug -> upload the debdiff. Hope it helps, if not, ping me on the irc and will be happy to help you :D

1. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/Merging

Revision history for this message
David Cordero (david.cordero) wrote :

Ok, i hope to have the right debdiff.

A manual about how to merge without use magical scripts could be more easy for understand what is the merge process. My package don't appear on Mom neither Dad, and I can't to use this scripts.

Revision history for this message
Nicolas Valcarcel (nvalcarcel) wrote :

On the changelog you have replaced the last entry, don't do that. What you need is to add another entry for your changes and leave the lastest entry as it is.

Revision history for this message
Nicolas Valcarcel (nvalcarcel) wrote :
Revision history for this message
David Cordero (david.cordero) wrote :

Thanks

Changed in photoprint:
status: Unknown → New
Changed in photoprint:
status: New → Fix Released
Revision history for this message
Wouter Stomp (wouterstomp-deactivatedaccount) wrote :

0.3.6-2 in debian fixes the problem and can be synced.

Changed in photoprint:
importance: Undecided → Wishlist
Revision history for this message
Maia Everett (linneris) wrote :

In this case, I'm changing it to a sync request (and ACKing), since the latest Debian change contains the same modifications as David Cordero's debdiff, and additionally were suggested by him.

 photoprint (0.3.6-2) unstable; urgency=low

   * Suggest `icc-profiles'.
   * Add descriptions to dpatches.
   * Thanks to David Cordero <email address hidden> for suggesting the
     changes above; closes: #463826.

 -- Milan Zamazal <email address hidden> Wed, 06 Feb 2008 18:40:57 +0100

Revision history for this message
Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote : Synced

Package(s) synced.

Changed in photoprint:
status: Confirmed → Fix Released
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.