# Hi folks,
#
# All of these bugs have been fixed in NMU, but not acknowledged by the
# maintainers. With version tracking in the Debian BTS, it is important to
# know which version of a package fixes each bug so that they can be tracked
# for release status in the BTS, so I'm closing these bugs w
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.21
> severity 326905 important
Bug#326905: guile-1.6_1.6.7-1.1(m68k/unstable/poseidon): FTBFS on m68k
Severity set to `important' from `serious'
>
End of message, stopping processing here
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.21
> tags 394583 sid
Bug#394583: darcs-buildpackage: FTBFS: cannot satisfy dependency
MissingH>=0.11.4
There were no tags set.
Tags added: sid
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:02:08 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#393680: fixed in e2fsprogs 1.39+1.40-WIP-2006.10.02+dfsg-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
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:02:08 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#393680: fixed in e2fsprogs 1.39+1.40-WIP-2006.10.02+dfsg-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
> My first analysis would be just removing the #ifdef/#endif for
> SHADOWPWD (and likely SHADOWGRP later).
>
> Nicolas, Chad, agreed?
Sounds right to me. If I read the notes in the upstream ChangeLog
correctly, they state that SHADOWPWD should be assumed to always be true.
cheryl desmarais,
Accoring to your prior history, my office can
offer you anywhere from 364K at 6.39% to 676K at 5.10%
www.sickite.com/16r
Please fill in some info & instantly recieve your FICO rating.
Negative scores are NOT a issue.
Thank you,
Jaime Edwardsd
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Sun, Oct 22, 2006 at 01:15:28AM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> I assume it's some bug in some other package (libghc6-missingh-dev?)
> that it's not set up properly or something. They all fail in finding
> MissingH.
>
> Please reassign this as needed.
I *think* this is related to the other bug yo
After quite some time, I discovered the problem to be
/var/spool/exim4/gnutls-params.
On my systems that hadn't been running exim4 before, but had freshly
installed this version, it was a happy ASCII text file.
On the system with the problem, it had binary data in it.
On a whim, I ran /usr/share
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 20:17:32 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#384951: fixed in drpython 161-3.1
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 y
0
> Build started at 20061021-0826
> **
> Checking available source versions...
> Fetching source files...
> Reading package lists...
> Building dependency tree...
> Need to get 37.8kB of
Package: exim4-daemon-heavy
Version: 4.63-7
Severity: serious
I have upgraded from exim4 4.50-8sarge2.
Now, whenever a client attempts to use TLS, I see:
2006-10-21 22:00:08 TLS error on connection from xxx (yyy) [x.x.x] (DH params
import): Base64 decoding error.
Nothing has changed with my ce
Hi,
Attached is the diff for my drpython NMU
diff -u drpython-161/debian/changelog drpython-161/debian/changelog
--- drpython-161/debian/changelog
+++ drpython-161/debian/changelog
@@ -1,3 +1,12 @@
+drpython (161-3.1) unstable; urgency=low
+
+ * Non-maintainer upload.
+ * Fixed deps to work with
nasya by sbuild/sparc 0.50
> Build started at 20061021-0826
> **
> Checking available source versions...
> Fetching source files...
> Reading package lists...
> Building dependency tree...
> Need to get 35.0
ild/sparc 0.50
> Build started at 20061021-0826
> **
> Checking available source versions...
> Fetching source files...
> Reading package lists...
> Building dependency tree...
> Need to get 24.6kB of
d started at 20061021-0825
> **
> Checking available source versions...
> Fetching source files...
> Reading package lists...
> Building dependency tree...
> Need to get 104kB of source archives.
> Get:1
We purchase unpaid Judgments
New found money to you and justice at the same time
You can reach us at:
1-303-480-5 7 1 2
We purchase uncollected Judicial Judgments
Above for additional info or to un-register or to see our address.
They tell you they are friendly when they positively hate yo
Matthias Klose wrote:
> Hi,
>
> would it be possible for you to have a look at avifile to work around
> #392559 by changing the avifile code?
Done. If we add "template" as suggested, the compiler just gets more
confused. But these member templates don't need to be doubly templated;
they are onl
Hi Martin!
Have you had time yet to fix this bug?
--
++
| Bas Zoetekouw | GPG key: 0644fab7 |
|| Fingerprint: c1f5 f24c d514 3fec 8bf6 |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 393273 important
Bug#393273: FTBFSes on arm because of libhunspell-dev not available
Severity set to `important' from `serious'
> severity 219436 wishlist
Bug#219436: libenchant1: binaries should go into a separate package
Severity set to `wis
tags 325206 +patch
thanks
The following patch fixes the gcc-4.x compilation errors. This patch,
along with the one at #394588 and the one at #355656 were used to
successfully build a rivet package in sid.
diff -Nru rivet-0.5.0.orig/src/rivetCore.c rivet-0.5.0/src/rivetCore.c
--- rivet-0.5.0.orig
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 18:32:10 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#394573: fixed in hdbc-sqlite3 1.0.1.2
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 n
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 325206 +patch
Bug#325206: rivet: FTBFS - invalid lvalue in assignment
There were no tags set.
Tags added: patch
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator,
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 18:32:07 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#394583: fixed in darcs-buildpackage 0.5.10
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
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 18:32:12 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#394580: fixed in missingh 0.16.2
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
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tag 326905 patch
Bug#326905: guile-1.6_1.6.7-1.1(m68k/unstable/poseidon): FTBFS on m68k
Tags were: sid
Tags added: patch
> severity 326905 serious
Bug#326905: guile-1.6_1.6.7-1.1(m68k/unstable/poseidon): FTBFS on m68k
Severity set to `serious' from `im
11 years ago our company discovered a totally new industry by accident. We
did extremely well in this new field and then a few years ago started
training others to help us in other parts of the country.
The others we have trained are now making 40-90K part time and 120 to 200K
full time.
The prof
tags 394519 moreinfo
severity 394519 normal
thanks
Hi. Can I get you to try upgrading your openafs-client? Also, can I
see the messages displayed in dmesg when openafs loads?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 355656 +patch
Bug#355656: FTBFS: ./configure: line 26383: syntax error near unexpected token
`('
There were no tags set.
Tags added: patch
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system a
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 394519 moreinfo
Bug#394519: openafs-modules-source: Cannot authenticate to my cell - "pioctl
failed"
There were no tags set.
Tags added: moreinfo
> severity 394519 normal
Bug#394519: openafs-modules-source: Cannot authenticate to my cell - "pioct
tags 355656 +patch
thanks
File tclconfig/tcl.m4 has two extra quotes. Old versions of bash did not
catch the errors.
The following patch solves the problem.
--- rivet-0.5.0.orig/tclconfig/tcl.m4 2004-12-03 04:34:22.0 +0100
+++ rivet-0.5.0/tclconfig/tcl.m42006-10-22 02:35:30.000
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 17:18:09 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#393017: fixed in speedy-cgi-perl 2.22-4
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
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 17:18:09 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#394446: fixed in speedy-cgi-perl 2.22-4
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
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.22
> tags 393720 + patch
Bug#393720: opensync: FTBFS: /opensync-0.19/tests/check_ipc.c:2062: warning:
passing argument 3 of 'create_case' from incompatible pointer type
Tags were: upstrea
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.22
> tags 393061 + patch
Bug#393061: FTBFS: error: conflicting types for 'set_bit'
There were no tags set.
Tags added: patch
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please contact me
create_case is better done as a macro that expands in situ:
#define CREATE_CASE(s, n, f) \
tc_new = tcase_create((n)); \
tcase_set_timeout(tc_new, 0); \
suite_add_tcase ((s), tc_new); \
tcase_add_test (tc_new, (f));
Each routine then becomes:
Suite *s = sui
Op do, 19-10-2006 te 20:02 +, schreef Joachim Breitner:
> Package: gaim-extendedprefs
> Version: 0.5-5
> Severity: grave
>
> Hi,
>
> please see
> http://svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/gaim?view=rev&revision=17479
>
> Gaim has changed the required values in the ui_requirement field of the
> plugi
Package: darcs-buildpackage
Version: 0.5.9
Severity: serious
Hi,
Various packages seems to be failing to build with this or simular error:
ghc -package Cabal Setup.lhs -o setup
./setup configure
setup: Warning: No license-file field.
Configuring darcs-buildpackage-0.5.3...
configure: /usr/bin/ghc
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 392078 + pending
Bug#392078: Fails to boot on SunBlade 100/150
Tags were: upstream
Tags added: pending
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator,
Package: libghc6-missingh-dev
Version: 0.16.1
Severity: serious
Hi,
When trying to install the build dependencies for arch2darcs I get the
following error:
Unpacking ghc6 (from .../archives/ghc6_6.6-1_amd64.deb) ...
Selecting previously deselected package ghc6-prof.
Unpacking ghc6-prof (from .../
Package: sound-juicer,libnautilus-burn4
Version: 2.16.1-1
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Since upgrading to s-j 2.16 I haven't been able to launch s-j. I get the
message, "No CD-ROM drives found".
Stepping through the code, i
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 15:47:23 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#386084: fixed in blam 1.8.2-3
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
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 362032 patch
Bug#362032: progsreiserfs_0.3.0.5-1(ia64/unstable): FTBFS: autoconf errors
There were no tags set.
Tags added: patch
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrat
tags 362032 patch
thanks
Hi,
The attached patch touches the autoconf files in the correct order, so
this won't happen. Please apply, thanks.
bye, Roman
diff -ur progsreiserfs-0.3.0.5.org/debian/rules
progsreiserfs-0.3.0.5/debian/rules
--- progsreiserfs-0.3.0.5.org/debian/rules 2006-10-21
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 15:47:23 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#364362: fixed in blam 1.8.2-3
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
Package: hdbc-sqlite3
Version: 1.0.1.1
Severity: serious
Hi,
Your package is failing to build with the following error:
cd testsrc && ghc --make -package mtl -package HUnit -package HDBC -lsqlite3
../dist/build/hdbc-sqlite3-helper.o -fglasgow-exts -I.. -o runtests
-i../dist/build:.. runtests.h
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:17:10 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 353853 patch
Bug#353853: gnobog_0.4.3-2.2(m68k/unstable/poseidon): fails to build from source
There were no tags set.
Tags added: patch
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system admin
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reopen 394121
Bug#394121: leave: debian/rules is not a makefile
Bug reopened, originator not changed.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs da
reopen 394121
thanks
Debian Bug Tracking System a écrit :
This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report
#394121: leave: debian/rules is not a makefile,
which was filed against the leave package.
It has been closed by Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
Their explanation is attached
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:29:39 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:12:51 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.22
> package apache2 apache2.2-common apache2-doc apache2-mpm-event
> apache2-mpm-perchild apache2-mpm-prefork apache2-mpm-worker
> apache2-prefork-dev apache2-src apache2-threaded-dev a
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:17:49 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:10:22 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:20:49 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
lde built successfully on my main amd64 box without a patch but I was
able to reproduce the reported error on an i386 box - unfortunately it
runs testing so I can't be sure that this patch will work on i386
unstable (amd64 is fine with or without). Could someone test for me
please?
--
Ne
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:11:41 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:09:21 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Loïc Minier wrote:
On Sat, Oct 21, 2006, Eugen Dedu wrote:
It does not work on my PPC system at all. Can you try it on a PPC machine?
Are you on a G3? What's your exact machine type?
Does "gst-inspect-0.10" crash for you? (it's in the
gstreamer0.10-tools package).
Hi,
Thank you for
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:24:35 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:05:47 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
tags 353853 patch
thanks
Hi,
The attached patch touches these files in the correct order, so this won't
happen. Please apply, thanks.
bye, Romandiff -ur gnobog-0.4.3.org/debian/rules gnobog-0.4.3/debian/rules
--- gnobog-0.4.3.org/debian/rules 2006-10-21 01:42:38.0 +0200
+++ gnobog
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:28:31 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:08:42 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:26:37 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:10:22 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:27:17 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:30:18 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:17:10 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:25:52 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:06:38 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:25:18 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:15:12 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:19:14 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:23:51 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:23:11 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.22
> package apache2 apache2.2-common apache2-doc apache2-mpm-event
> apache2-mpm-perchild apache2-mpm-prefork apache2-mpm-worker
> apache2-prefork-dev apache2-src apache2-threaded-dev a
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:04:46 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:20:06 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:21:29 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Package: mediawiki1.5
Severity: grave
Tags: security
Justification: user security hole
mediawiki1.5 is vulnerable to CVE-2006-2611, which is already fixed in
mediawiki1.7. mediawiki1.5 is also scheduled for removal (390491).
Hence, it should be removed from testing.
Cheers,
Moritz
-- Sys
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:19:14 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:22:25 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.21
> tags 394475 sid
Bug#394475: minpack_19961126-9+b2(hppa/unstable): FTBFS: bad build-depends
There were no tags set.
Tags added: sid
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 21:58:57 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 21:59:51 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:03:42 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 21:42:33 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 21:49:20 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 21:38:23 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 21:45:24 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 21:51:07 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 21:54:41 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 21:48:11 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 21:25:29 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 21:48:11 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 21:56:11 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 21:24:17 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
Your message dated Sat, 21 Oct 2006 21:59:51 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixing version-tracking for already fixed-in-NMU bug
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 c
1 - 100 of 231 matches
Mail list logo
