Re: arch-all-package shown with two versions on p.d.o

2007-06-11 Thread Frank Küster
Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It was a stale m68k Packages file lying around plus the fact that > I still had m68k in the testing architecture list. > > Should be fixed now. Ah, many thanks! Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f

Re: arch-all-package shown with two versions on p.d.o (was: Bug#427859: lmodern fails to configure on upgrade, dpkg error)

2007-06-11 Thread Frank Lichtenheld
On Sun, Jun 10, 2007 at 02:17:49PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote: > Florent noticed that for tex-common, two versions are listed as being > available in testing although the package is Arch: all: > Florent Rougon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > BTW, I don't understand why both 1.0.1 and 1.7 are liste

Re: arch-all-package shown with two versions on p.d.o

2007-06-11 Thread Frank Lichtenheld
On Sun, Jun 10, 2007 at 06:46:48PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote: > Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> > http://packages.debian.org/cgi-bin/search_packages.pl?keywords=tex-common&searchon=names&subword=1&version=all&release=all > >> > > >> > Any idea? > >> > >> I have none, is anyone abl

Re: arch-all-package shown with two versions on p.d.o

2007-06-10 Thread Paul Wise
On 6/10/07, Frank Küster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Who is responsible for p.d.o? djpig & Joey and some others: http://blog.djpig.de/en/devel/debian/packages-status-update.html http://blog.djpig.de/en/devel/debian/tabbed-packages.html -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

Re: arch-all-package shown with two versions on p.d.o

2007-06-10 Thread Frank Küster
Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > http://packages.debian.org/cgi-bin/search_packages.pl?keywords=tex-common&searchon=names&subword=1&version=all&release=all >> > >> > Any idea? >> >> I have none, is anyone able to help? Is this a problem in the script >> that generates packages.debia

Re: arch-all-package shown with two versions on p.d.o (was: Bug#427859: lmodern fails to configure on upgrade, dpkg error)

2007-06-10 Thread Julian Gilbey
On Sun, Jun 10, 2007 at 02:17:49PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote: > Hi all, > > Florent noticed that for tex-common, two versions are listed as being > available in testing although the package is Arch: all: > > Florent Rougon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > BTW, I don't understand why both 1.0.1 a

Re: arch-all-package shown with two versions on p.d.o (was: Bug#427859: lmodern fails to configure on upgrade, dpkg error)

2007-06-10 Thread Michael Banck
Hi, On Sun, Jun 10, 2007 at 02:17:49PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote: > Florent noticed that for tex-common, two versions are listed as being > available in testing although the package is Arch: all: > > Florent Rougon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > BTW, I don't understand why both 1.0.1 and 1.7 a

arch-all-package shown with two versions on p.d.o (was: Bug#427859: lmodern fails to configure on upgrade, dpkg error)

2007-06-10 Thread Frank Küster
Hi all, Florent noticed that for tex-common, two versions are listed as being available in testing although the package is Arch: all: Florent Rougon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > BTW, I don't understand why both 1.0.1 and 1.7 are listed for > testing at: > > http://packages.debian.org/cgi-bin/sea