Ubuntu
anki package

updating package to sync with debian.

Asked by executorvs

is there any reason anki cannot be synced with the package used by Debian (located --> http://packages.debian.org/sid/anki ) or the package made by anki ( http://code.google.com/p/anki/downloads/list ) as either package would restore the functionality of the program.
currently multiple decks do not remain stored in the program and must be opened from external files each time you change decks. also you cannot use the online server to keep decks synchronized across multiple computers.

Neither of these bugs is in the two packages listed above and there do not seem to be any dependencies not already included in ubuntu.

Question information

Language:
English Edit question
Status:
Answered
For:
Ubuntu anki Edit question
Assignee:
No assignee Edit question
Last query:
Last reply:
Revision history for this message
George Standish (george-standish-deactivatedaccount) said : 		#1

Executorvs,

Well, bad news for you, Lucid is using the same version as Karmic.

!info anki karmic
<ubottu> anki (source: anki): flashcard learning program with special support for Japanese. In component universe, is optional. Version 0.9.9.7.8-1 (karmic), package size 934 kB, installed size 3252 kB

!info anki lucid
<ubottu> anki (source: anki): flashcard learning program with special support for Japanese. In component universe, is optional. Version 0.9.9.7.8-1 (lucid), package size 934 kB, installed size 3252 kB

The bug 371286 certainly seems to suggest that upgrading would be beneficial, I see you commented there.

Hope it gets packaged, best of luck,
George

Revision history for this message
executorvs (executorvs) said : 		#2

my thought was that it is packaged. why isn't the updated package ported? does EVERY package have to be built for every version of ubuntu each release or is it possible to nominate a package used by Mint or debian for inclusion? my understanding is that the repos are essentially copied at the beginning of each development cycle and updated as needed, is this wrong? if not, I'm uncertain as to why the newer version couldn't be updated or included in the backports.

if I'm making sense and not missing something glaringly obvious (been under lots of stress lately and prone to missing the obvious) is there something I could do to help get the ball rolling?

Can you help with this problem?

Provide an answer of your own, or ask executorvs for more information if necessary.

To post a message you must log in.