That's strange, since r3 can be found on a number of mirrors.
Dave Bristel
On Fri, 17 Sep 1999, Josip Rodin wrote:
> Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 16:51:03 +0200
> From: Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Chris Rutter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: Debian developers list <debian-devel@lists.debian.org>
> Subject: Re: Debian 2.1r3
> Resent-Date: 17 Sep 1999 14:55:08 -0000
> Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ;
>
> On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 03:44:36PM +0100, Chris Rutter wrote:
> > The current `sub-release' (whatever) of Debian 2.1 is r3, right?
> > I was just wondering, as all references on the web site are to r2,
> > but I thought I received a message from the security team about
> > r3 last week somtime. Just wanted to check before I filed a
> > boring bug report, or something. </pedant>
>
> Nope, r2 is still official, apparently there have been some problems with
> syncing packages on some architectures.
>
> --
> enJoy -*/\*- don't even try to pronounce my first name
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
