Your message dated Tue, 30 Oct 2001 14:56:51 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#101742: fixed in erlang-slang 1.0-1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Darren Benham
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 21 Jun 2001 08:11:19 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Jun 21 03:11:19 2001
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from ng by master.debian.org with local (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
        id 15CzYc-0004H6-00; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 03:11:18 -0500
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 03:11:18 -0500
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: ITP: erl-slang -- Erlang interface to the slang library
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
From: Mark Ng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Package: wnpp


http://www.erlang.org/contrib/slang-1.0.tgz

license: should be free. :)



---------------------------------------
Received: (at 101742-close) by bugs.debian.org; 30 Oct 2001 19:58:36 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Oct 30 13:58:36 2001
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from auric.debian.org [206.246.226.45] (mail)
        by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
        id 15yf1v-0002Hp-00; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 13:58:35 -0600
Received: from troup by auric.debian.org with local (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
        id 15yf0F-00050Z-00; Tue, 30 Oct 2001 14:56:51 -0500
From: Mark Ng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.59 $
Subject: Bug#101742: fixed in erlang-slang 1.0-1
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: James Troup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 14:56:51 -0500
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
erlang-slang, which has been installed in the Debian FTP archive:

erlang-slang_1.0.orig.tar.gz
  to pool/main/e/erlang-slang/erlang-slang_1.0.orig.tar.gz
erlang-slang_1.0-1.dsc
  to pool/main/e/erlang-slang/erlang-slang_1.0-1.dsc
erlang-slang_1.0-1_i386.deb
  to pool/main/e/erlang-slang/erlang-slang_1.0-1_i386.deb
erlang-slang_1.0-1.diff.gz
  to pool/main/e/erlang-slang/erlang-slang_1.0-1.diff.gz



A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to [EMAIL PROTECTED],
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Mark Ng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (supplier of updated erlang-slang package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED])


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2001 00:28:40 +1000
Source: erlang-slang
Binary: erlang-slang
Architecture: source i386
Version: 1.0-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Mark Ng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Changed-By: Mark Ng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Description: 
 erlang-slang - S-Lang interface for Erlang
Closes: 101742
Changes: 
 erlang-slang (1.0-1) unstable; urgency=low
 .
   * Initial Release  (closes: #101742)
Files: 
 d27c2c471894b942941b7e320c221d55 676 interpreters optional 
erlang-slang_1.0-1.dsc
 ea101e2de19910d3311ba8da44c71766 118229 interpreters optional 
erlang-slang_1.0.orig.tar.gz
 7c36461c38f8b126c2edd8b50af9a4a4 2477 interpreters optional 
erlang-slang_1.0-1.diff.gz
 e4bcd5309a013be0d93ef2b8fa32d644 63408 interpreters optional 
erlang-slang_1.0-1_i386.deb

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE72tCSufThRdeR35oRAoyCAJ0eISR0g0kFkAFtzYBs0xfF2QIzJgCfRDx1
pwR0z263dVZLxZKd4CqYUVQ=
=AjJ6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Reply via email to