Your message dated Fri, 18 May 2007 08:27:25 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#424947: dependency typo: texlive-doc-cn vs. texlive-doc-ch
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
On Fre, 18 Mai 2007, Trent Buck wrote:
> texlive-full depends on texlive-doc-cn, a package that does not exist.
> I note that texlive-doc-ch DOES exist, and is not depended upon. This
> is probably a typo.
Closing this bug, -6 texliive-full depends on -doc-zh which is the right
name. -doc-ch is g
Norbert Preining <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Don, 17 Mai 2007, Frank Küster wrote:
>> The second paragraph is an additional restriction, but clause forgotwhat
>> of the GPL forbids additional restrictions, so we cannot redistribute.
>
> Grmmm. Brmm.
>
> What about bringing it to texlive mailin
Your message dated Fri, 18 May 2007 08:15:24 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line closing texlive-lang RC bug wrt jadetex
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, 18 May 2007 14:47:05 +0900
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#422639: FTBFS: error: X11/extensions/render.h: No such
file or directory
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt w
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.2
> owner 424465 !
Bug#424465: tomcat5.5 - FTBFS: 36 problems (5 errors, 31 warnings)
Owner recorded as Marcus Better <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Pl
- Forwarded message from "Gerald (Jerry) Carter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 17:35:04 -0500
From: "Gerald (Jerry) Carter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Samba] samba-3.0.25 on Debian
X-CRM114-Status: Good
Hi Stefan,
This bug has now been tagged 'pending' for over a month. Can you give an
ETA on when the fixed package might be uploaded?
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
[
subscribe 418642 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello, Michael.
I've made some tests with smart and rpm here and I could stress smart a
little more. :-)
What follows is a description of my actions. I will not include the
errors, because I think they can be easily reproducible. If this is not
true, I may pos
Hi,
I've fixed the bug in a new build, I will play around with it a bit
and then fire it off to my sponsor to upload.
Thanks,
Tyler
Debian PHP Maintainers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Package: php4-apache2-mod-bt
> Severity: serious
> User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Us
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.4
> clone 382175 -1
Bug#382175: glibc: contains possibly non-free code
Bug 382175 cloned as bug 424957.
> reassign -1 portmap
Bug#424957: glibc: contains possibly non-free code
Bug reass
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.4
> reopen 418642
Bug#418642: missing dependency on rpm
Bug reopened, originator not changed.
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debi
Package: kdeedu
Version: 4:3.5.6-2
Severity: serious
Just a note that kdeedu fails to build with the new boost version 1.34.0:
...
checking boost/shared_ptr.hpp usability... yes
checking boost/shared_ptr.hpp presence... yes
checking for boost/shared_ptr.hpp... yes
configure: WARNING: Kig needs th
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 421786 + pending
Bug#421786: php-imagick: FTBFS: pkg-config: command not found
There were no tags set.
Tags added: pending
> tags 418309 + pending
Bug#418309: php4: Should not be included in Lenny
Tags were: sid
Tags added: pending
> tags 424831
reopen 4184642
thanks
Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report
> #418642: missing dependency on rpm,
> which was filed against the smartpm package.
>
> It has been closed by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Their explanation is attached below. If this
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 22:57:00 -0300
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line some smart channels require write access to some directories
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 n
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Greg Wooledge escribió:
> Package: rtorrent
> Version: 0.7.4-2
> Followup-For: Bug #423107
>
>
> I get the same symptom as the original reporter. Running rtorrent clears
> the screen, switches the terminal into some non-canonical mode, and writes
>
On May 14, Michael Ablassmeier ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Package: opensp
> Severity: serious
> Version: 1.5.2-3
> Justification: policy violation
>
> hi,
>
> Lucas has rebuild the archive on i386 and your package Failed to Build
> from Source with the following error:
>
> test -z
Package: texlive-full
Version: 2007-5
Severity: serious
texlive-full depends on texlive-doc-cn, a package that does not exist.
I note that texlive-doc-ch DOES exist, and is not depended upon. This
is probably a typo.
This is a serious (if trivial) mistake, because it prevents the
texlive-full be
Package: rtorrent
Version: 0.7.4-2
Followup-For: Bug #423107
I get the same symptom as the original reporter. Running rtorrent clears
the screen, switches the terminal into some non-canonical mode, and writes
rtorrent: symbol lookup error: rtorrent: undefined symbol:
_ZN7torrent21max_download_
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 23:32:03 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#424930: fixed in treil 1.0-2
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 your r
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.4
> reassign 340269 openoffice.org-help-zh-cn
Bug#340269: openoffice.org-help-zh-cn: help directory should be renamed to
zh-CN, or just create a link
Bug reassigned from package `openoff
Please also declare Conflicts: and Replaces: (and perhaps Provides:)
glchess, which is in the same situation.
Thanks!
--
Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC (amu at alum.mit.edu, ucko at debian.org)
Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] (NOT a valid e-mail address) for more info.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROT
Package: treil
Version: 1.0-1
Severity: serious
Hi,
Your package is failing to build with the following error:
mkdir -p x86_64-linux && cd x86_64-linux && /usr/bin/ruby ../extconf.rb &&
/usr/bin/make
../extconf.rb:17:in `require': no such file to load -- mkmf (LoadError)
from ../extconf.
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.8.14
> close 423964
Bug#423964: ttf-junicode: FTBFS: SyntaxError: invalid syntax
'close' is deprecated; see http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#closing.
Bug closed, send any further explana
Package: gnome-games
Version: 1:2.18.1-1
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 7.5
Preparing to replace gnome-games 1:2.16.3-1 (using
.../gnome-games_1%3a2.18.1-1_amd64.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement gnome-games ...
dpkg: error processing
/var/cache/apt/archives/gnome-games_1%3a2.18.1-1_amd64.
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 22:32:03 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#420359: fixed in libwiki-toolkit-plugin-ping-perl 0.01-3
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 n
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 22:32:02 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#423803: fixed in libmail-field-received-perl 0.24-2
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 th
Aníbal Monsalve Salazar wrote:
> On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 02:21:35AM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
>> tags 417040 + patch
>> thanks
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Attached is the diff for my pidentd 3.0.19.ds1-1.1 NMU during the
>> current BSP which I uploaded to delayed-0.
>
> Hello Luk :)
Hi Anibal
> After building
Package: pidentd
Version: 3.0.19.ds1-1.1
Severity: normal
Tags: patch
Hi,
Attached is the diff for my pidentd 3.0.19.ds1-1.2 NMU fixing the
problem with -1.1.
--
Luk Claes - http://people.debian.org/~luk - GPG key 1024D/9B7C328D
Fingerprint: D5AF 25FB 316B 53BB 08E7 F999 E544 DE07 9B7C 328D
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.4
> found 340269 2.0.3-6
Bug#340269: openoffice.org-help-zh-cn: help directory should be renamed to
zh-CN, or just create a link
Bug marked as found in version 2.0.3-6.
>
End of message
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> package googleearth-package
Ignoring bugs not assigned to: googleearth-package
> severity 424921 normal
Bug#424921: googleearth-package: Generated binary kills my Xserver session
after starting it
Severity set to `normal' from `grave'
> tag 424921 up
package googleearth-package
severity 424921 normal
tag 424921 upstream
thanks
On Thursday 17 May 2007 14:26:33 Erik Schanze wrote:
> Severity: grave
> Justification: causes non-serious data loss
>
> the made binary googleearth_4.1.7076.4458+0.1.0-1_i386.deb will kill
> my Xserver session.
> After
Package: googleearth-package
Version: 0.1.0
Severity: grave
Justification: causes non-serious data loss
*** Please type your report below this line ***
Hi,
the made binary googleearth_4.1.7076.4458+0.1.0-1_i386.deb will kill
my Xserver session.
After starting googleearth it displays the startup p
On Don, 17 Mai 2007, Frank Küster wrote:
> The second paragraph is an additional restriction, but clause forgotwhat
> of the GPL forbids additional restrictions, so we cannot redistribute.
Grmmm. Brmm.
What about bringing it to texlive mailing list?
I can also ask my polish friends, maybe they h
Norbert Preining <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> Am I right that we can close this bug?
Unfortunately not.
> I compared the files as distributed on CTAN with those in TL2007 as
> shipped by us and there is no diff at all.
>
> So I guess this is history?
>
> But Frank, I am not really su
Ok, more analysis of this bug:
This is a summary of all `failed' messages and warnings:
`pdftex -ini -jobname=etex -progname=etex -translate-file=cp227.tcx *etex.ini'
failed
`pdftex -ini -jobname=pdfetex -progname=pdfetex -translate-file=cp227.tcx
*pdfetex.ini' failed
`etex -ini -jobname=jadet
On Don, 10 Mai 2007, Matthias Cramer wrote:
> this fixes the bug, after applying that all installs perfect.
Well, this would be a fix for a different bug, but not for this bug
number, as it deals with a failed etex format building.
But still interesting to know.
Best wishes
Norbert
--
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#386846: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#409132: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#384173: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#366100: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#366100: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Hi all!
Strange, with the upload of jadetex -12 I wrote in the changelog:
* The above together with depending on texlive 2007 fixes the interference
with texlive-lang-cyrillic (Closes: #419026, #419020) [np]
But #419026 wasn't closed, prbably because it didn't belong to jadetex.
I guess we
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#409132: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#409132: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#401639: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#401639: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#386846: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#401639: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#386846: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#384173: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#386846: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#384173: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#384157: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#401639: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#384173: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#401639: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#384157: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#384157: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#409132: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#409132: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#364535: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#409132: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#364535: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#384157: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#386846: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#386846: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#386846: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#409132: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#364535: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#364535: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#384173: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#401639: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#384173: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#384173: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#384157: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#384157: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#401639: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#366100: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#366100: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#366100: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#366100: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#364535: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#364535: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#384157: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#366100: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 19:47:06 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#364535: fixed in ispell 3.1.20.0-4.4
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 no
Hi all!
Am I right that we can close this bug?
I compared the files as distributed on CTAN with those in TL2007 as
shipped by us and there is no diff at all.
So I guess this is history?
But Frank, I am not really sure what was the original problem in tetex,
so I await your answer.
Best wishes
tags 416739 + patch
thanks
Hi,
The patch attached makes the call in the postrm script to debconf and
sysv-rc conditional. That way cyrus-common-2.2 no longer depends on
non-essential packages in postrm.
Have a nice day,
Javi (vicho)
diff -u cyrus-imapd-2.2-2.2.13/debian/cyrus-common-2.2.postrm
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 416739 + patch
Bug#416739: depends on non-essential package debconf in postrm
Tags were: etch-ignore
Tags added: patch
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(adminis
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 424808 pending
Bug#424808: php4-rrdtool: affected by php4-removal
Tags were: sid
Tags added: pending
> block 424808 by 423352
Bug#423352: RM: php4-rrdtool -- RoM; unmaintaned package, abandoned upstream,
RC bugs
Bug#424808: php4-rrdtool: affected
tags 424808 pending
block 424808 by 423352
thanks
On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 06:13:10AM -0400, Debian PHP Maintainers wrote:
> This package has been identified as affected by the removal of php4 in debian.
>
> As php4 will soon be removed, it is very important that we:
> - update the dependencies o
On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 04:09:51PM +0200, Raúl Sánchez Siles wrote:
> tags 424510 +patch
> thanks
>
> Hello:
>
> I wrote an e-mail to the maintainers some days ago. The problem as I see it
> is that on the debian/control file the architectures listed for the binary
> packages are any-386 an
Package: gcstar
Version: 1.1.1-2
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
Alexander,
I just made another attempt to use gcstar instead of gcfilms, but I think I'm
hitting https://gna.org/bugs/?7885 or something similar. I can import my
collection from gcfilms, but after saving the
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 18:47:14 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#421085: fixed in scanlogd 2.2.5-2.1
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
Your message dated Thu, 17 May 2007 18:44:59 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#423622: fixed in bcm5700-source 8.3.14-3
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 i
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tag #415667 +pending patch
Bug#415667: ksudoku - FTBFS: trying to create local folder /srv: Permission
denied
There were no tags set.
Tags added: pending, patch
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug
tag #415667 +pending patch
thanks
Hi!
During this weekends BSP I fixed this ftbfs. It is because it tries to create
$HOME if it doesn't exist. For some weird reasons Bastian Blank has setup
the buildds to use /srv as $HOME, which I consider quite much more broken
than other archs that clearl
tags 421075 +patch
thanks
Hello Peter,
I prepared a little NMU for this issue but I didn't upload it since I
get also many lintian errors and I don't have enought time to fix all
the stuff... And I don't like to NMU libraries, I don't want to break to
much :-)
So here I attached the patch which
1 - 100 of 294 matches
Mail list logo
