[Debian GNUstep maintainers] Misc issues with gnustep-base

[Eric Heintzmann]

Le 22/10/2017 à 20:56, Yavor Doganov a écrit :
> Eric Heintzmann wrote:
>> During your tests, have you also checked the non Debian GNUstep
>> Maintainers packages ? (biococoa, oolite , openvpn-auth-ldap, sbjson,
>> sope, unar, sogo ...)
> Of course.
>
>> (There are also Gürkan's pending uploads: chess.app and pikopixel.app)
> I don't have access to the sources so I haven't tested these.  Since
> they're not in the archive (yet) they won't be binNMUed anyway.
>
>> Le 22/10/2017 à 18:32, Yavor Doganov a écrit :
>>> Unrelated suggestion: I propose to add this snippet to
>>> gnustep-make/debian/addons/config.mk:
>> I think it is a good idea.
>> And It seems to me a good idea to upload this change now, before
>> uploading other GNUstep packages.
>> But on the other hand, I don't like the idea of multiplying uploads.
>> What do you think ?
> There is no need to hurry and mass changes to packages only because of
> this are certainly unnecessary.  When the packages are updated as time
> goes by, one of the things to update will be to remove this duplicated
> code (if the package is not a candidate for backports).  We used the
> very same approach when GNUSTEP_MAKEFILES/GNUSTEP_INSTALLATION_DOMAIN
> were defined in config.mk in 2.6.6-2.

no i mean, push this change now just in gnustep-make, before downloading
gnustep-base.