On 2013-03-01 17:56:33 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote: > Apparently this file should not have been in -minimal in the first > place, and on i386 (and other architectures, it seems) it has been in > python2.7 even in version 2.7.3-6. But on amd64, it has been in > python2.7-minimal which I find quite inexplicable.
Was the amd64 version built under the same conditions? BTW, I haven't received any of your two mail messages, neither directly from you (as my address was in the To/Cc field), nor via the 702005.bugs.debian.org list (as I'm subscribed to this bug). There isn't any trace of connection for these two messages in the logs of my mail server. I've just received the "Processed:" mail via the 702005.bugs.debian.org list. I'm replying by using "bts show --mbox 702005". -- Vincent Lefèvre <vinc...@vinc17.net> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
