gcc-defaults override disparity

There are disparities between your recently accepted upload and the override file for the following file(s): libgcj-dev_3.3.5-3_i386.deb: package says section is devel, override says libdevel. Either the package or the override file is incorrect. If you think the override is correct and the pac

gcc-defaults_1.21_i386.changes ACCEPTED

Accepted: chill_2.95.4-36_i386.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-defaults/chill_2.95.4-36_i386.deb cpp-doc_3.3.5-3_i386.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-defaults/cpp-doc_3.3.5-3_i386.deb cpp_3.3.5-3_i386.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-defaults/cpp_3.3.5-3_i386.deb g++_3.3.5-3_i386.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-defaults/g++_3

Bug#301584: marked as done (libgcj-dev: Uninstallable: Bad dependency)

Your message dated Sat, 26 Mar 2005 20:02:23 -0500 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#301584: fixed in gcc-defaults 1.21 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

Processing of gcc-defaults_1.21_i386.changes

gcc-defaults_1.21_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: gcc-defaults_1.21.dsc gcc-defaults_1.21.tar.gz cpp_3.3.5-3_i386.deb cpp-doc_3.3.5-3_i386.deb gcc_3.3.5-3_i386.deb gcc-doc_3.3.5-3_i386.deb g++_3.3.5-3_i386.deb gobjc_3.3.5-3_i386.deb g77_3.3.5-

Processed: tagging 301584

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.8.10 > tags 301584 sid Bug#301584: libgcj-dev: Uninstallable: Bad dependency Tags were: patch Tags added: sid > End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assi

Bug#301584: libgcj-dev: Uninstallable: Bad dependency

Package: libgcj-dev Severity: grave Version: 4:3.3.5-2 Tags: patch The libgcj-dev package added in today's gcc-defaults upload is uninstallable since it Depends on `libgcj4-dev (>= 4:3.3.5-2)', but the actual current version of libgcj4-dev is 1:3.3.5-12. I've attached a patch which fixes the depe

Bug#168871: marked as done (mhonarc segfaults on attached mbox; upstream says it's not theirs :))

Your message dated Sat, 26 Mar 2005 19:15:11 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line closing report, unreproducible with current versions 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

Bug#298023: marked as done (gcc-snapshot: ftbfs [sparc] cannot find -l-gnu-java-awt-peer-gtk)

Your message dated Sat, 26 Mar 2005 19:00:14 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line fixed in gcc-snapshot 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