Your message dated Tue, 8 Apr 2003 16:46:43 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line done 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; 5 Apr 2003 02:07:32 +0000 >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Apr 04 20:07:31 2003 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from raptor.tntech.edu [149.149.11.199] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian)) id 191d5f-0004mi-00; Fri, 04 Apr 2003 20:07:31 -0600 Received: from cerf [149.149.39.108] by raptor.tntech.edu with ESMTP (SMTPD32-7.15) id AA5C74380190; Fri, 04 Apr 2003 20:07:24 -0600 Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 20:07:24 -0600 From: Jeffrey Austen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: different libc6 versions show up on different web pages Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: Balsa 1.2.4 Content-Length: 371 Lines: 8 X-RBL-Warning: HELOBOGUS: Domain cerf returns a server failure for MX or A records. X-Declude-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [149.149.39.108] X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail for spam. X-Spam-Tests-Failed: HELOBOGUS, IPNOTINMX [6] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.0 required=4.0 tests=HAS_PACKAGE,SMTPD_IN_RCVD,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01 version=2.44 X-Spam-Level: * Package: www.debian.org According to <http://packages.qa.debian.org/g/glibc.html> the version of glibc, of which libc6 is a component, in testing is 2.3.1-16 but according to <http://packages.debian.org/cgi-bin/search_packages.pl?keywords=libc6&searchon=names&version=all&release=all> the version of libc6 in testing is libc6 2.2.5-9.woody.3 which is not the same. --------------------------------------- Received: (at 187670-done) by bugs.debian.org; 8 Apr 2003 23:44:25 +0000 >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Apr 08 18:44:24 2003 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from svfulraptor1.beckman.com (catalunya) [134.217.237.30] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian)) id 1932lL-0000hg-00; Tue, 08 Apr 2003 18:44:23 -0500 Received: from kraai by catalunya with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1932nb-0004eG-00 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 08 Apr 2003 16:46:43 -0700 Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 16:46:43 -0700 From: Matt Kraai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: done Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Sender: Matt Kraai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.2 required=4.0 tests=SIGNATURE_SHORT_DENSE,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01,USER_AGENT, USER_AGENT_MUTT version=2.44 X-Spam-Level: Howdy, Joy has applied and improved my patch. The version of libc6 in testing is now shown to be 2.3.1-16. I also checked that the security updates for stable are still shown. Matt -- It's most certainly GNU/Linux, not Linux. Read more at http://www.gnu.org/gnu/why-gnu-linux.html.