Your message dated Thu, 9 Mar 2017 19:17:17 +0000 with message-id <09032017191556.ffd244472...@desktop.copernicus.org.uk> and subject line Re: Bug#618533: gs-esp has disappeared has caused the Debian Bug report #618640, regarding RFP: capt -- first-generation Canon winprinter (e.g. LBP-1120) support 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 this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 618640: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=618640 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---Package: gs-esp Version: 8.71~dfsg2-9 Severity: normal In a normal upgrade aptitude removed the canon printer driver cndrvcups-common I find it has a dependency on gs-esp which has disappeared from the archive. Downloading it by hand and installing it with dpkg -i gets back the canon driver -- System Information: Debian Release: wheezy/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-686 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US (charmap=ISO-8859-1) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Versions of packages gs-esp depends on: ii ghostscript 9.01~dfsg-2 interpreter for the PostScript lan ii ghostscript-x 9.01~dfsg-2 interpreter for the PostScript lan gs-esp recommends no packages. gs-esp suggests no packages. -- no debconf information
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---On Wed 16 Mar 2011 at 08:23:29 +0530, Rustom Mody wrote: > In a normal upgrade aptitude removed the canon printer driver > cndrvcups-common > > > I find it has a dependency on gs-esp which has disappeared from the archive. > > Downloading it by hand and installing it with dpkg -i gets back the canon > driver > This report was filed against a package which is no longer distributed in Debian. Additionally, I think it could be wishful thinking to expect any enhancement request to be realised any time soon, especially when the printer depends on a non-free driver. Should we carry this bug in the BTS indefinitely? I think not; hence closing. Sorry. Regards, Brian.
--- End Message ---
