Your message dated Wed, 17 Aug 2005 23:56:38 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line conflicts are known and good
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 responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 3 Aug 2005 11:08:15 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 03 04:08:15 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from mail.cs.tu-berlin.de [130.149.17.13] (root)
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1E0H6d-0006W0-00; Wed, 03 Aug 2005 04:08:15 -0700
Received: from mailhost.cs.tu-berlin.de ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [130.149.17.13])
by mail.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.9.3p2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA10385
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 3 Aug 2005 13:08:13 +0200 (MEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mailhost.cs.tu-berlin.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC476FD46
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 3 Aug 2005 13:08:12 +0200 (MEST)
Received: from mailhost.cs.tu-berlin.de ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (bueno [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10224) with ESMTP
id 25826-14 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Wed, 3 Aug 2005 13:08:12 +0200 (MEST) 13904
Received: from bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de (bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de [130.149.19.1])
by mailhost.cs.tu-berlin.de (Postfix) with ESMTP
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 3 Aug 2005 13:08:12 +0200 (MEST)
Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.8/Submit) id j73B8Cuo009436;
Wed, 3 Aug 2005 13:08:12 +0200 (MEST)
From: Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2005 13:08:12 +0200
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: bogus version in dependency
X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.4 (patch 17) "Jumbo Shrimp" XEmacs Lucid
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at cs.tu-berlin.de
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
Package: libsidplay1
Version: 1.36.59-3.0.1
the version in
Conflicts: libsidplay1.36, sidplay (<= 1.36.36), libsidplay1-c102 (<=
1.36.59-2)
is bogus, even a newer libsidplay1-c102 conflicts with libsidplay1.
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 321089-done) by bugs.debian.org; 17 Aug 2005 21:53:40 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 17 14:53:39 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from client-121-22.kabelszatnet-2002.hu (svn.gcs.org.hu)
[195.38.121.22]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1E5Vqt-0002bH-00; Wed, 17 Aug 2005 14:53:39 -0700
Received: from gcs.lsc.hu (unknown [192.168.0.123])
by svn.gcs.org.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEDC363D3
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 17 Aug 2005 23:53:10 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: conflicts are known and good
From: Laszlo Boszormenyi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 23:56:38 +0200
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no
version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
Hi Matthias,
Version 1.36.59-1 and 1.36.59-2 had a libsidplay1-c102 binary package.
So 1.36.59-3 and upwards have to conflict with them, as the -c102 suffix
was dropped with this version, but both 1.36.59-[12] contains similar
files with 1.36.59-3, so the conflict was necessary or dpkg will bail
out that it can not upgrade the libsidplay1 packages.
Regards,
Laszlo/GCS
--
BorsodChem Joint-Stock Company www.debian.org Linux Support Center
Software engineer Debian Developer Developer
+36-48-511211/23-85 +36-20-4441745
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
