Your message dated Sat, 7 Oct 2006 16:03:12 +1000
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#391461: twinkle 1:0.9-1 is uninstallable, depends on
missing libraries
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.21
> # only serious if the maintainer thinks it makes the package unreleasable
> severity 391353 important
Bug#391353: aide: Doesn't work suitably on Xen enabled kernel because of
statica
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 19:32:09 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#389681: fixed in apt-listbugs 0.0.60
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 no
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> package backupninja
Ignoring bugs not assigned to: backupninja
> tags 391519 + pending
Bug#391519: backupninja: unclear symlinks/globbing support in dup and rdiff
handlers can lead to data loss
Tags were: fixed-upstream
Tags added: pending
> tags 363
Package: backupninja
Version: 0.9.3-6
Severity: grave
Tags: fixed-upstream
As thoroughly discussed [1] on backupninja's mailing-list,
incompatibilities between various readlink and backupninja versions
cause hardly predictable behaviour when using symlinks and/or globbing
in include/exclude/vsincl
I definitely wasn't expecting this. A fix would be great, and perhaps
some more caution in the future with testing before pushing such a
debilitating upgrade down to the many users out there :)
Starting web server (apache2)...apache2: Syntax error on line 185 of
/etc/apache2/apache2.conf: Synt
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> found 389681 0.0.59
Bug#389681: Retrieving bug reports... 0% ... E: undefined local variable or
method `pkg' for Factory::BugsFactory:Module
Bug marked as found in version 0.0.59.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assis
http://bjorn.haxx.se/debian/testing.pl?package=apt says
trying to update apt from 0.6.46 to 0.6.46.1 (candidate is 2 days old)
* apt is only 2 days old. It must be 10 days old to go in.
* apt is in freeze; contact debian-release if update is needed
--
Ross Boylan
http://bjorn.haxx.se/debian/testing.pl?package=apt says
trying to update apt from 0.6.46 to 0.6.46.1 (candidate is 2 days old)
* apt is only 2 days old. It must be 10 days old to go in.
* apt is in freeze; contact debian-release if update is needed
The second point suggests the fix will not go
Thijs Kinkhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello Walter,
>
> > reopen 370295
>
> > > Please do not reopen this bug again.
> >
> > This bug has not been resolved. So I have reopened it. Please do not
> > close it until it has been resolved. Getting an answer to the
> > questions I posted wil
>
> Debian Bug report logs - #324848
> avifile-player: Uninstallable due to dependency on
> libqt3c102-mt
>
> Package: avifile-player; Maintainer for avifile-player is Zdenek Kabelac
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Source for avifile-player is avifile.
>
found 389681 0.0.59
thanks
Hi,
>
> > Could you try to reproduce with
> >
> > /usr/sbin/apt-listbugs list apt-listbugs -d
>
>
> Same here, direct connection.
Thanks, there was a bug in initialization path that made SOAP
processing ignore apt.conf proxy configuration.
Should be fixed in
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:08:48 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#391074: fixed in sdljump 1.0.0-2
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 yo
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:32:36 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#390786: fixed in apache2 2.2.3-2
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 yo
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:32:36 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#390893: fixed in apache2 2.2.3-2
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 yo
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:10:11 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#391308: fixed in vlc 0.8.6-svn20061001.debian-4
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 ca
Le ven 2006-10-06 a 13:13:10 -0400, Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> a dit:
>
> Hi
>
> The latest version of mol-modules-source should support building with
> and without make-kpkg. Building with module-assistant is currently (and
> was never) not supported.
>
> I'm working on i
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:32:36 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#390786: fixed in apache2 2.2.3-2
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 yo
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:32:36 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#390893: fixed in apache2 2.2.3-2
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 yo
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:32:36 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#390774: fixed in apache2 2.2.3-2
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 yo
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:08:14 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#391269: fixed in otrs 1:1.3.3p01-3
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 message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:04:22 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#391469: fixed in cdparanoia 3.10+debian~pre0-2
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 cas
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:32:36 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#390823: fixed in apache2 2.2.3-2
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 yo
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:32:36 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#391018: fixed in apache2 2.2.3-2
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 yo
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:32:36 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#390893: fixed in apache2 2.2.3-2
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 yo
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:08:57 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#386814: fixed in uae 0.8.25-2
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
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:32:36 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#390893: fixed in apache2 2.2.3-2
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 yo
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:32:36 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#390774: fixed in apache2 2.2.3-2
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 yo
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:08:38 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#387334: fixed in pythoncad 0.1.33-2
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 message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:32:36 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#390794: fixed in apache2 2.2.3-2
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 yo
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:32:36 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#390893: fixed in apache2 2.2.3-2
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 yo
Package: kdebase
Version: 4:3.5.5-1
Severity: serious
Justification: violates policy
The latest package update introduced a strict dependency on hal and
pmount. While the hal dependency is correct, the pmount dependency is
not. KDE simply calls the hal Mount()/Unmount() methods, nowhere in the
KDE
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:17:13 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#391370: fixed in bootchart 0.9-4
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 yo
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 390819 apache2
Bug#390819: Apache2.2 upgrade makes apache2-common --remove fail
Bug reassigned from package `apache2-common' to `apache2'.
> tag 390819 + pending
Bug#390819: Apache2.2 upgrade makes apache2-common --remove fail
There were no ta
Am Freitag, 6. Oktober 2006 21:57 schrieb Bastian Blank:
> Known bug in the kernel, use 2.6.18.
Unfortunately, linux-image-2.6.18-1-xen-k7 does not boot at all on that
system. I'd file a bug report, but due to the lack of a console access, all
information I can provide at the moment is "does no
I have no filters and I also suffer from this bug on Evo 2.8.1-1.
Regards,
Andrew Barr
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
since my previous message i have been advised that because this package
already depended on gaim it should be removed from unstable rather than
converted into a dummy.
i've been told that such removal requests are made by submitting a bug on
the ftp.debian.org psudo package, if noone objects withi
As an update to bug report #379388, I just spent a few moments on the phone
with Dr R Lusk, the acting director of the MCS division at Argonne National
Labs where pgapack originates.
Dr Lusk is sympathetic to getting pgapack relicensed and suggests the simpler
MPICH2 license that was used for som
Shouldn't debhelper compatibility be bumped to "5" in debian/compat file?
"python-all-dev" build dependency can be replaced with "python-dev"
(package is build for current python version only). "python" will work
as well, but I recommend to use "python-dev" since one of my arch:all
packages failed
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 391448 linux-image-2.6.17-2-xen-686
Bug#391448: xen-hypervisor-3.0-unstable-1-i386: dom0 crashes when starting the
3rd domU
Bug reassigned from package `xen-hypervisor-3.0-unstable-1-i386' to
`linux-image-2.6.17-2-xen-686'.
> forcemerge 3898
Shouldn't debhelper compatibility be bumped to "5" in debian/compat file?
"python-all-dev" build dependency can be replaced with "python-dev"
(package is build for current python version only). "python" will work
as well, but I recommend to use "python-dev" since one of my arch:all
packages failed
On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 07:04:05PM +0100, peter green wrote:
> making this build against 2.0.0beta3.1 in my sid chroot was pretty easy, i
> just nicked some headers that are no longer in the official public interface
> of gaim from the gaim source package (yes eliminating the dependance on non
> pu
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 21:33:32 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Seems fixed w/ 0.8.25
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 responsibili
Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> Hi,
Hi Kurt,
> Your package is failing to build on a few arches with the following
> error:
> CFLAGS="-Wall -g -O2" ./configure --host=x86_64-linux-gnu
> --build=x86_64-linux-gnu --prefix=/usr --mandir=\${prefix}/share/man
> checking build system type... Invalid configuratio
tags 391242 +patch
thanks.
making this build against 2.0.0beta3.1 in my sid chroot was pretty easy, i
just nicked some headers that are no longer in the official public interface
of gaim from the gaim source package (yes eliminating the dependance on non
public interfaces is a good move long term
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 391430 important
Bug#391430: OO crashes when opening a *.doc, while openoffice.org-help-de is
installed
Severity set to `important' from `grave'
> tag 391430 + unreproducible
Bug#391430: OO crashes when opening a *.doc, while openoffice.org-h
sametime support is now a built in feature of the main gaim package so this
package should be reduced to a dummy for ease of upgrading.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 391242 +patch
Bug#391242: Uninstallable due to unavailable gaim (<1:2.0)
Tags were: sid
Tags added: patch
> thanks.
Unknown command or malformed arguments to command.
> making this build against 2.0.0beta3.1 in my sid chroot was pretty easy, i
Un
Package: apache2
Version: 2.2.3-1
Severity: serious
When upgrading, I get the following log:
LANG=C apt-get -f install
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done
Correcting dependencies... Done
The following extra packages will be installed:
apache2.2-common
The following pac
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 11:17:11 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#390919: fixed in gnash 0.7.1+cvs20061006.1521-1
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 ca
Package: spread
Version: 3.17.3-4
Severity: serious
Hello Michael,
There is an error when attempting to purge spread:
Removing spread ...
Purging configuration files for spread ...
/var/lib/dpkg/info/spread.postrm: line 4: deluser: command not
dpkg: error processing spread (--purge):
Package: cdparanoia
Version: 3.10+debian~pre0-1
Severity: serious
Hi,
Your package is failing to build on a few arches with the following
error:
CFLAGS="-Wall -g -O2" ./configure --host=x86_64-linux-gnu
--build=x86_64-linux-gnu --prefix=/usr --mandir=\${prefix}/share/man
checking build system ty
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 391331 php-fpdf
Bug#391331: ldap-account-manager: etch version broken
Bug reassigned from package `ldap-account-manager' to `php-fpdf'.
> merge 391331 388711
Bug#388711: ldap-account-manager failure when open in web browser and login
Bug#39133
Package: gatos
Version: 0.0.5-16
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
When trying to launch xatitv I get the following error message:
> xatitv
GATOS: No ATI PCI/AGP Cards ?
GATOS: gatos_inita(): Invalid argument
xatitv: gatos_init(): Invalid argument
and the program finishes,
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> found 391278 0.9.12-1
Bug#391278: CVE-2006-5111: libksba denial of service (application crash)
vulnerability
Bug marked as found in version 0.9.12-1.
> notfound 391278 1.0.0-1
Bug#391278: CVE-2006-5111: libksba denial of service (application crash)
v
Your message dated Fri, 6 Oct 2006 19:23:17 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#389735: blootbot: fails to install
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 y
Package: smtpd
Version: 2.0-8
Severity: serious
Hello John,
There is an error when attempting to purge smtpd:
Removing smtpd ...
Purging configuration files for smtpd ...
/var/lib/dpkg/info/smtpd.postrm: line 25: update-inetd: command not found
dpkg: error processing smtpd (--purge):
s
Your message dated Fri, 6 Oct 2006 19:06:10 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#391410: guifrications ftbfs on powerpc buildd because of
problem installing gij
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been d
Hello Rene,
Am Freitag, den 06.10.2006, 18:18 +0200 schrieb Rene Engelhard:
> severity 391430@ important
> tag 391430@ + unreproducible
> tag 391430@ + moreinfo
> thanks
>
> You "of course" omitted the interesting parts; i.e. the versions of the
> OOO packages.
Sorry for that, here it comes:
$
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.21
> block 390336 with 391444
Bug#390336: Uninstallable due to dependency boson conflicting with boson-base
Was not blocked by any bugs.
Blocking bugs of 390336 added: 391444
>
End of mes
severity 391445 normal
thanks
building the cross compilers is a non-default setup; it's unfortunate
that it's broken.
Jim Heck writes:
> Package: gcc-4.1
> Version: 4.1.1ds1-13
> Severity: serious
> Justification: no longer builds from source
>
> Building gcc as a cross compiler for powerpc targ
Your message dated Fri, 6 Oct 2006 18:51:30 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line mol-modules-source 0.9.71~pre9-2 supports building with
make-kpkg
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
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tag 299855 - fixed
Bug#299855: apache2: bash completion for administration tools
Tags were: fixed patch
Tags removed: fixed
> tag 349416 - fixed
Bug#349416: FTBFS: apr_sendfile for the Hurd
Tags were: fixed upstream patch
Tags removed: fixed
> tag 374
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 18:44:50 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixed in NMU
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 reo
Hi Sesse,
After I had updated my workstation today I would not do a complete boot
anymore.
The new version of libnss-ldap does not update the symlinks created by
update-rc.d. After upgrade I still had the following content
in /etc/rc*.d:
/etc/rc0.d/K01libnss-ldap
/etc/rc1.d/K01libnss-ldap
/etc/r
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.21
> severity 391372 normal
Bug#391372: please provide package to allow static link agains libc6-xen
Severity set to `normal' from `serious'
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
P
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 18:44:50 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixed in NMU
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 reo
severity 391430@ important
tag 391430@ + unreproducible
tag 391430@ + moreinfo
thanks
Andre Timmermann wrote:
> -- System Information:
> Debian Release: testing/unstable
> APT prefers unstable
> APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
> Architecture: i386 (i686)
> Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
> K
This bug is fixed for me with latest OO.o Debian package (2.0.4~rc3-1).
No more crashes and I can open any document.
Claudio
--
Claudio Saavedra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 18:44:50 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixed in NMU
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 reo
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.10
> severity 390819 grave
Bug#390819: Apache2.2 upgrade makes apache2-common --remove fail
Severity set to `grave' from `important'
> merge 390819 390893
Bug#390819: Apache2.2 upgrade ma
Package: kwin
Version: 4:3.5.5-1
Followup-For: Bug #391357
I can confirm that I use "focus follows mouse" here, and my
problem behavious with kwin 4:3.5.5-1 was consistent with
what the other poster reported.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers unstable
APT
Package: twinkle
Version: 0.6.2-1
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
When trying to upgrade twinkle from 0.6.2-1 to 1:0.9-1 in a Debian unstable
machine:
darwin:~# apt-get install twinkle
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done
On Fri, 2006-10-06 at 15:48 +0200, Bas Zoetekouw wrote:
> Sound like a removal candidate. Are there any packages in Debian that
> offer similar functionality?
Not really, but there's two clients for the same protocol in Debian
which have even lower popcon numbers. A websearch for the implemented
Package: gcc-4.1
Version: 4.1.1ds1-13
Severity: serious
Justification: no longer builds from source
Building gcc as a cross compiler for powerpc target on i386 platform,
gcc will not build. The following components are in use.
binutils 2.17-2
libc6_2.3.6.ds1-4_powerpc.deb
libc6-dev_2.3.6.ds1-4_
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 17:37:10 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#391331: ldap-account-manager: etch version broken
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
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.21
> found 391357 4:3.5.5-1
Bug#391357: konsole flashes and is unusable under kde 3.5.5-1
Bug marked as found in version 4:3.5.5-1.
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please con
Hi Brian,
Brian May schrieb:
>> Warning: Wrong parameter count for class_exists() in
>> /usr/share/php/fpdf/fpdf.php on line 12
>>
>
>
> I replaced this condition with "if (true)" and not all I get is a blank
> page. Hmmm
this is a bug in the package php-fpdf. Please try installing php-f
Your message dated Fri, 06 Oct 2006 09:03:11 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#391355: fixed in tex-common 0.31
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 yo
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 391355 serious
Bug#391355: remove bogus 99postinst.cnf created by tetex-bin upgrade from
woody, breaks texlive
Severity set to `serious' from `normal'
> tags 391355 pending
Bug#391355: remove bogus 99postinst.cnf created by tetex-bin upgrade
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.10
> package apache2 apache2.2-common apache2-doc apache2-mpm-event
> apache2-mpm-perchild apache2-mpm-prefork apache2-mpm-worker
> apache2-prefork-dev apache2-threaded-dev apache2-utils
Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Package: texinfo
> Version: 4.8.dfsg.1-2~bpo.1
> Severity: serious
>
> Setting up linux-kernel-headers (2.6.17.10-3) ...
> Setting up texinfo (4.8.dfsg.1-2) ...
> Running mktexlsr. This may take some time. ... done.
> dpkg: error processing texinfo (--conf
Hello all,
> even pulling in the postgresql-client build-dep does not help much (the
> database handling is quite hacky, for example it always assumes postgres
> to run on localhost etc. etc.). The package should be updated to use
> something like `dbconfig-common' for setting up its database.
o
Package: openoffice.org-help-de
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-ck1-schleppi66
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> package python-pymetar
Ignoring bugs not assigned to: python-pymetar
> tags 391391 + patch
Bug#391391: python-pymetar: Module does not get registred
There were no tags set.
Tags added: patch
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 374741 important
Bug#374741: seems unable to download any feeds
Severity set to `important' from `serious'
> retitle 374741 rawdog fails to write output file (hangs in feedparser.py)
Bug#374741: seems unable to download any feeds
Changed Bug t
This one time, at band camp, peter green said:
> i belive the soloution is to make gij-4.1 pre-depend on libgcj7-0
Surely a simple Depends should do the trick? Is the problem just
shlibdeps aren't properly calaculated?
--
-
| ,''
Your message dated Fri, 6 Oct 2006 16:06:55 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line fixed
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
Camm Maguire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Greetings, and thanks! I agree, have been unable to reproduce by
> hand. Is there any way I can requeue a package as an ordinary
> developer, or must such requests be handled manually via email request
> to the buildd admins? I've always been a bit fru
hi,
On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 04:15:13PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> Combined, I don't think fixing the RC bug(s) is worth the effort for the
> package in its current state.
>
> Any objections to removal?
no, please go ahead.
bye,
- michael
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bastian Blank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Package: gs-gpl
> Version: 8.54.dfsg.1-1
> Severity: grave
>
> After an update from 8.50-1.1 ps2pdf segfaults with a ps file generated
> by dvi2ps.
>
> | Starting program: /usr/bin/gs -dSAFER -dCompatibilityLevel=1.2 -q
> | -dNOPAUSE -dBATCH -sDEVICE=pdfw
(note to bts: forwarding as I managed to not send it to the submitter
the first time)
Hi there,
Could you run /usr/sbin/blootbotsetup manyally for me and tell me the
output (if any)?
Does anything appear in the logs in /var/log/blootbot/ ?
Many thanks,
Neil
--
I'll run a script, posting some
-- Message transmis --
Subject: kwin 4:3.5.5-1 causes problems (window flicker/flashing)
Date: ven 6 octobre 2006 14:06
From: Arthur Marsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: debian-kde@lists.debian.org
I've reported this as Debian bug #391357.
After several combinations of upgrades and
> This one time, at band camp, peter green said:
> > i belive the soloution is to make gij-4.1 pre-depend on libgcj7-0
> Surely a simple Depends should do the trick?
according to http://packages.debian.org/unstable/devel/gij-4.1 a depends is
already there.
i thought pre-depends was needed to gaur
severity 374741 important
retitle 374741 rawdog fails to write output file (hangs in feedparser.py)
clone 374741 -1
reassign -1 python-feedparser
block 374741 by -1
thanks
On Mon, Oct 02, 2006 at 01:00:24AM +0200, Christian Aichinger wrote:
> The problem lies with feedparser, it chokes on one of t
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.21
> tags 388993 confirmed
Bug#388993: rest2web-doc: non-free Firefox icon included
There were no tags set.
Tags added: confirmed
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please conta
Greetings, and thanks! I agree, have been unable to reproduce by
hand. Is there any way I can requeue a package as an ordinary
developer, or must such requests be handled manually via email request
to the buildd admins? I've always been a bit frustrated by this, as
the only sure fire way I have
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 391357 kwin
Bug#391357: konsole flashes and is unusable under kde 3.5.5-1
Bug reassigned from package `konsole' to `kwin'.
> stop
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(a
Package: libept-dev
Version: 0.4.2
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 3.5
Considering libept.pc's declaration of
Requires: ... sigc++-2.0 ...
and some libept headers' inclusion of libsigc++ headers, libept-dev
really ought to declare a dependency on libsigc++-2.0-dev. (As it
stands, debtag
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 388106 important
Bug#388106: maxdb-webtools: postinst failure (error while loading shared
libraries: libc.so.6)
Severity set to `important' from `grave'
> tags 388106 unreproducible
Bug#388106: maxdb-webtools: postinst failure (error while lo
1 - 100 of 166 matches
Mail list logo
