Bug#403639: Fix committed in svn repo

[Frans Pop]

Hi Loïc,

Again our thanks for your quick and excellent response.

On Tuesday 09 January 2007 20:12, Loïc Minier wrote:
>  It's not trivial to backport, the upstream 2.10 code doesn't map so
>  well with our 2.8.20 with backported directfb and I think it wouldn't
>  be possible to pull the 2.10 directfb files as they rely on the
>  internal 2.10 functions.  :-/
>
>  I've applied the patch by hand the best I could, it built, could you
>  please try the packages at:
>    
> <http://people.dooz.org/~lool/debian/gtk+2.0/2.8.20-4/sid-pbuilder/>

I have tested the udeb from that location by rebuilding the installer with 
as only change that udeb, and I can confirm that the memory leaks are 
(almost?) completely gone. I have done a full installation and not 
noticed any regressions or problems.

If there still is a memory leak due to progress bars, it must be very 
small and could probably be ignored for Etch, but I'll let Attilio decide 
on that.

Loïc: How invasive is this patch? How would you judge the risk of 
regressions? Do you feel comfortable defending it for the RMs?

Thanks again,
FJP
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-gnome-maintainers/attachments/20070111/1ac9142c/attachment-0001.pgp