Arnaud Vandyck a écrit :
On 10/3/07, Encolpe Degoute [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Package: argouml
The last offical version is the 0.24 and was launched the Feb 15, 2007.
The 0.19.8 have been released the Nov 8, 2005.
Is there a maintener for this package ?
Yes but not very active at the
On 10/3/07, Encolpe Degoute [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Arnaud Vandyck a écrit :
Yes but not very active at the moment, but you are free to help of course:
http://people.debian.org/~avdyk/TODO/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/tmp/package/tarballs$ svn co
http://svn.alioth.debian.org/svn/pkg-java/package
Arnaud Vandyck a écrit :
On 10/3/07, Encolpe Degoute [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Arnaud Vandyck a écrit :
Yes but not very active at the moment, but you are free to help of course:
http://people.debian.org/~avdyk/TODO/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/tmp/package/tarballs$ svn co
Julien Cristau a écrit :
On Wed, Oct 3, 2007 at 13:09:30 +0200, Encolpe Degoute wrote:
Package: argouml
Severity: critical
You'll need some justification if you want to make this a critical bug.
The whole system doesn't get broken just because this particular package
is a bit old.
The
On 10/3/07, Encolpe Degoute [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Julien Cristau a écrit :
You'll need some justification if you want to make this a critical bug.
The whole system doesn't get broken just because this particular package
is a bit old.
The goal was to awake mainteners... It seems to
Accepted:
libpixie-java_0.8.7-1.diff.gz
to pool/main/libp/libpixie-java/libpixie-java_0.8.7-1.diff.gz
libpixie-java_0.8.7-1.dsc
to pool/main/libp/libpixie-java/libpixie-java_0.8.7-1.dsc
libpixie-java_0.8.7-1_all.deb
to pool/main/libp/libpixie-java/libpixie-java_0.8.7-1_all.deb
Version: 5.5.23-1
On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 08:46:35PM +0200, Patrick Winnertz wrote:
dpkg-source: warning: file
servletapi/jsr154/dist/docs/api/javax/servlet/ServletOutputStream-uses.html
has no final newline (either original or modified version)
dpkg-source: warning: file
Your message dated Wed, 3 Oct 2007 20:41:27 +0200
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#442748: tomcat5.5: FTBFS if build twice in a row
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
On Sat, Sep 29, 2007 at 10:41:47PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Cyril Brulebois:
Forwarding the question to the (hopefully) appropriate persons.
From: Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Bug#441122: cacao - FTBFS: undefined reference to
`__data_start'
To: Cyril Brulebois
tomcat5.5_5.5.25-1_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
tomcat5.5_5.5.25-1.dsc
tomcat5.5_5.5.25.orig.tar.gz
tomcat5.5_5.5.25-1.diff.gz
tomcat5.5_5.5.25-1_all.deb
libtomcat5.5-java_5.5.25-1_all.deb
tomcat5.5-webapps_5.5.25-1_all.deb
Accepted:
libtomcat5.5-java_5.5.25-1_all.deb
to pool/main/t/tomcat5.5/libtomcat5.5-java_5.5.25-1_all.deb
tomcat5.5-admin_5.5.25-1_all.deb
to pool/main/t/tomcat5.5/tomcat5.5-admin_5.5.25-1_all.deb
tomcat5.5-webapps_5.5.25-1_all.deb
to pool/main/t/tomcat5.5/tomcat5.5-webapps_5.5.25-1_all.deb
kaffe_1.1.8-1_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
kaffe_1.1.8-1.dsc
kaffe_1.1.8.orig.tar.gz
kaffe_1.1.8-1.diff.gz
kaffe_1.1.8-1_all.deb
kaffe-common_1.1.8-1_all.deb
kaffe-dev_1.1.8-1_all.deb
jikes-kaffe_1.1.8-1_all.deb
kaffe-doc_1.1.8-1_all.deb
Accepted:
jikes-kaffe_1.1.8-1_all.deb
to pool/main/k/kaffe/jikes-kaffe_1.1.8-1_all.deb
kaffe-common_1.1.8-1_all.deb
to pool/main/k/kaffe/kaffe-common_1.1.8-1_all.deb
kaffe-dev_1.1.8-1_all.deb
to pool/main/k/kaffe/kaffe-dev_1.1.8-1_all.deb
kaffe-doc_1.1.8-1_all.deb
to
There are disparities between your recently accepted upload and the
override file for the following file(s):
kaffe-doc_1.1.8-1_all.deb: package says section is doc, override says
interpreters.
Either the package or the override file is incorrect. If you think
the override is correct and the
Your message dated Wed, 03 Oct 2007 22:02:07 +
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#433906: fixed in kaffe 2:1.1.8-1
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
Hi security team and Jetty package maintainers,
I'm the main developer of the Jetty Java HTTP Server.
I have been contacted by a Nico Golde @ debian.org asking
about the availability of a fix for a security vulnerability for
the debian package of Jetty but that the maintainers had
no time to
16 matches
Mail list logo