On 9 August 2010 06:55, Graeme Gill <graeme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I know you've slightly renamed your version, but something in the package > description, or that shows up on package installation indicating what > functionality is missing or (possibly) suspect/untested should be enough. How about this: +This packaged version is Hargyllcms, which is a friendly fork of Argyllcms, +but does come with the following caveats: + + * Internal versions of jcnf, libusb and libtiff are removed and system + versions are used. This may cause some instruments that worked with the + modified internal library versions to not work with the system versions. + * The UCMM functionality has been removed due to incompatible jcnf versions. + * It's recomended you check with the "official" version of argyll available + from http://www.argyllcms.com/ before reporting bugs upstream. Richard.