On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 00:45, Colin Watson <[email protected]> wrote: > reopen 538060 > thanks > > On Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 10:33:03PM +0000, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: >> Your message dated Mon, 4 Oct 2010 23:30:05 +0100 >> with message-id <[email protected]> >> and subject line Re: Bug#538060: vga=XXX is ignored at boot >> has caused the Debian Bug report #538060, >> regarding [grub-pc] vga=XXX is ignored at boot >> to be marked as done. > > Argh. I just noticed that the original report of #538060 in fact > explicitly said that gfxpayload didn't help. I did not realise that > Francesco's mail was a follow-up to an existing bug, because in my > mailer it looked exactly like a new bug report! > > Dear reportbug maintainer: I get confused by this quite often. It would > be lovely if you could ensure that follow-ups to existing bugs sent > using reportbug *always* look different from new bug reports in some > very clear way.
Any suggestion? -- Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu) My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/ Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi _______________________________________________ Reportbug-maint mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/reportbug-maint
