Bug#562647: gidentd: diff for NMU version 0.4.5+dfsg1-0.3

2010-01-03 Thread Thorsten Glaser
Julien Cristau dixit: >Shouldn't we remove this package instead? It has had exactly one upload >by its current maintainer, in 2003, and I'm sure we have other ident >daemons. Well, it *does* have some users: http://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=gidentd However, its original author said he do

Bug#562647: gidentd: diff for NMU version 0.4.5+dfsg1-0.3

2010-01-03 Thread Julien Cristau
On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 16:07:53 +, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > Hi, > > same as last time, but this time, only fixing this particular bug. > Will ask my AM to upload to DELAYED/5. > Shouldn't we remove this package instead? It has had exactly one upload by its current maintainer, in 2003, and

Bug#562647: gidentd: diff for NMU version 0.4.5+dfsg1-0.3

2010-01-03 Thread Thorsten Glaser
Hi, Hi, same as last time, but this time, only fixing this particular bug. Will ask my AM to upload to DELAYED/5. //mirabilos -- Sometimes they [people] care too much: pretty printers [and syntax highligh- ting, d.A.] mechanically produce pretty output that accentuates irrelevant detail in the

Bug#562647: gidentd: diff for NMU version 0.4.5+dfsg1-0.3

2009-12-31 Thread Thorsten Glaser
tags 562647 + pending thanks Dear Martin, I have prepared an NMU for gidentd (version 0.4.5+dfsg1-0.3) to fix the RC bug #562647 (Does not work with ipv4 after recent change in netbase) as well as a number of other problems with the package, for example lintian’s complaints and that configure was