[Bug 1521299] Re: Please merge freetype 2.6.3-3 from Debian testing

Steve Langasek steve.langasek at canonical.com
Mon Apr 11 22:39:05 UTC 2016


I agree that it appears 2.6.3 would be preferable due to the fuzzing
fixes.  However, as freetype has a history of introducing behavior
regressions on a fairly regular basis, this is not a straightforward
change to make during feature freeze because it's not easy to
regression-test.  I don't believe I am in a position to drive this for
16.04.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Foundations Bugs, which is subscribed to freetype in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1521299

Title:
  Please merge freetype 2.6.3-3 from Debian testing

Status in freetype package in Ubuntu:
  Triaged
Status in freetype package in Debian:
  Fix Released

Bug description:
  Please update the package to 2.6.3. There's quite a bit of interesting
  new features and stability fixes via fuzzing since 2.5.x.

  Have a look at www.freetype.org -> "More on the 2.6.2 release for users and developers".
  -------------------------------------------------------------------------

  freetype (2.6.3-3) unstable; urgency=medium

    * Install the now-available-upstream manpages for freetype-demos.
      Closes: #131137.
    * Register all of the HTML documentation with doc-base.  Closes: #451660.
    * Suppress lintian warning about symbols file declaring dependency on
      other package, which is entirely by design.

   -- Steve Langasek <vorlon at debian.org>  Tue, 01 Mar 2016 06:43:44
  +0000

  freetype (2.6.3-2) unstable; urgency=medium

    * Adjust symbols file to actually produce invalid dependencies when
      internal symbols are used, as intended.

   -- Steve Langasek <vorlon at debian.org>  Tue, 01 Mar 2016 03:29:18
  +0000

  freetype (2.6.3-1) unstable; urgency=medium

    * New upstream release.  Closes: #812518, LP: #1521299
      - stem darkening now disabled by default.  Closes: #801370.
    * Avoid marking private symbols as supported from 2.6.1 on.  Apparently
      dpkg-gensymbols doesn't do what I expected for this kind of declaration
      anyway, but we should at least avoid marking them wrong in the source.
    * Update to Standards-Version 3.9.7.

   -- Steve Langasek <vorlon at debian.org>  Tue, 01 Mar 2016 00:04:14
  +0000

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/freetype/+bug/1521299/+subscriptions



More information about the foundations-bugs mailing list