[arch-dev-public] [signoff] gpm 1.20.3

[Aaron Griffin]

On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Eric Belanger
<belanger at astro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 22 Apr 2008, Dan McGee wrote:
>
>
> > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 10:01 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 8:46 PM, Eric Belanger
> > >  <belanger at astro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >  in testing for both arches.
> > > >
> > > >  Changes:
> > > >
> > > >  - minor upstream update
> > > >
> > > >  - patches cleanup. One of them has been merged upstream, the others
> didn't
> > > > applied anymore. However, they were mostly to prevent gpm from
> interfering
> > > > with some terminal apps like vim and mc. They don't seem to be
> necessary
> > > > anymore as vim and mc works correctly from the tests I did.
> > > >
> > > >  - closes FS#9949 : The /usr/lib/libgpm.so.1 symlink was present on
> the
> > > > system but for unkonw reasons was no longer in the package. For this
> reason,
> > > > forcing is necessary to install gpm 1.20.3.  I don't know how to
> inform the
> > > > users about this ( front page news? or just keep an eye on the
> forum/ML to
> > > > answer user's concern)
> > >
> > >  Other than the need to force, this seems to be fine. Maybe a
> > >  pre_upgrade message that it is ok to force it? /me shrugs
> > >
> > >  I'll signoff on i686
> > >
> >
> > I'll signoff for i686 as well. The force did catch me off guard
> > though, it might be worth a news item. I actually didn't know that
> > everyone would have to do it until I took a look at this signoff
> > email.
> >
> > -Dan
> >
> >
>
>  Any x86_64 signoff?
>
>  I'll do a news item tonight and will post it here for a review.

I can sign off. I didn't do any hard-core testing, but it broke nothing for me.