Comment 26 for bug 968845

As there was a question on IRC: I really meant to say that for precise it is okay to have a pm-utils *script* workaround, not that it actually needs to live in the pm-utils package. It is equally fine to ship it in x-x-i-s if people prefer. On second thought that actually makes more sense, as the workaround can be removed at the same time when the real fix comes in.