Comment 19 for bug 68481

I've been very disappointed with the speed at which patches are dealt with. When I submitted the debdiff above -- 10 months ago -- it was correct [1]. Because my original patch was ignored, enough time has passed that policy has changed and it has become incorrect.

The fix is for "edgy" which is two releases behind my current Ubuntu environment and I don't have time to learn/install pbuilder right now. I fix packages because we use them at my workplace. I've taken the time to learn to build correct debdiff files specifically so I can share them on Launchpad and, more importantly, with other Ubuntu users.

We keep our own apt repository of fixed packages and at this point I sometimes report bugs / upload patches and sometimes don't. It doesn't appear to be worth my time and effort to report / upload files. The reports are generally ignored and stagnate until the release is so old it's mostly irrelevant [2].

I'm not going to fix and reupload this.

.:. brainsik

p.s. The fix you want is to a single word in the changelog version. It probably took the same amount of time to reject the package and post a comment as it would have taken to edit the patch and accept the package.

[1] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/SRU?action=recall&rev=31

[2] E.g, "edgy" users have either already gotten around this bug (since the package is unusable as-is) or have moved on to a later release, it's unlikely someone will build a new "edgy" machine for the first time and deploy it live, and on the off-chance someone is doing a chain of upgrades, such as dapper -> gutsy, there's little need to build this module at the "edgy" step (just do it at the final step, "gutsy").