On Sat, 2008-09-20 at 18:07 +0100, Tim Cutts wrote:
> Yes, I know. That particular sin predates my adoption of the package,
> so I don't know why it was there. I've uploaded a patch now - what do
> I need to do to ensure it gets into Lenny?
Request a freeze exception by writing a mail to de
On 20 Sep 2008, at 1:42 pm, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
When I noticed that it was intentional, I brought it up on #debian-qa
for that very reason, we (in particular Christoph Berg and me) came to
the conclusion that it is indeed a policy violation and thus an RC
bug.
Overriding the local administ
Hi Tim,
thanks for the fast reply!
Tim Cutts wrote:
> Thanks very much for the patch, but don't upload yet - I need to think
> about this. I'm pretty certain there was a good reason for running it
> directly, but I can't now think what it was. You're probably right,
> though.
When I noticed tha
Thanks very much for the patch, but don't upload yet - I need to think
about this. I'm pretty certain there was a good reason for running it
directly, but I can't now think what it was. You're probably right,
though.
On 20 Sep 2008, at 2:22 am, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
tags 498707 + patch
tags 498707 + patch
thanks
Hi,
The following is the diff for a proposed am-utils 6.1.5-11.1 NMU.
It is pending testing, depending on how that goes, I may upload this.
I might add that
# If amd was running, we don't care about invoke-rc.d's opinion and
# restart amd.
was discussed on #debian-qa
5 matches
Mail list logo
