Oops. Clean version attached.
--
[ Todd J. Troxell ,''`.
Student, Debian GNU/Linux Developer, SysAdmin, Geek : :' :
http://debian.org || http://rapidpacket.com/~xtat`. `'
`-
On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 02:25:05AM +0100, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> The solution then is to make a directory below var/run/ and run the
> daemon as a dedicated user (or daemon). for instance
> var/run/anon-proxy/foo.pid
A patch to do this is attached.
Cheers,
--
[ Todd J. Troxell
Package: python-libgmail
Version: 0.0.8+cvs20041108-2
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
The following error occurs on access to a gmail mount.
ERROR:gmailfs:Exception getting
query:subject:path=__startpathfsendpath__
ERROR:gmailfs:Exception getting
query:subject:p
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 289025 + pending
Bug#289025: debmirror needs a NEWS file
Tags were: patch
Tags added: pending
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian B
tags 282873 sarge
thanks
The sparc binary packages for nhc98 have been removed from unstable;
unfortunately, the version of nhc98 in unstable doesn't build on m68k, so
this package cannot progress to testing. We may need to have the sparc
binaries manually removed from testing as well before this
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 19:57:15 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line no really, I'm gonna close it
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 respo
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 282873 sarge
Bug#282873: nhc98 causes hat build to fail on sparc
There were no tags set.
Bug#289150: nhc98 causes hat build to fail on sparc
Tags added: sarge
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bu
gst-plugins will shortly be removed from Debian. Since this was
marked fixed in NMU, I'm closing.
dave...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: streamripper
Version: 1.61.3-1
Severity: grave
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.8
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968)
Versions of packages streamripper depends o
Il giorno dom, 06-02-2005 alle 13:56 +0100, Josselin Mouette ha scritto:
> This seems to be a bug in GTK+ 2.6. I'll investigate further.
>
> Making it serious, not as a real severity, but as we really can't
> release with that; it's completely breaking theme support.
Thanks. I considered minor be
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.8.10
> tags 293945 sid
Bug#293945: qtparted: Not installable in unstable
There were no tags set.
Tags added: sid
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need a
Your message dated Sun, 06 Feb 2005 20:02:23 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#292806: fixed in pmk 0.9.2-1
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 your r
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> submitter 262490 !
Bug#262490: tdb_1.0.6-8_mips: FTBFS: opcode not supported on this processor:
mips1
Changed Bug submitter from Anibal Monsalve Salazar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to
Anibal Monsalve Salazar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
> submitter 262512 !
Bug#2625
On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 05:58:05PM -0500, Brenda J. Butler scribbled:
>
> Ok, so I saw the new email to this bug and downloaded the
> upstream 0.9.2 version and tried that.
>
> It still fails in cpu detection, this time the
> error message _is_ printed and it says:
>
> Error : cannot open '/home
Thomas Viehmann wrote:
> tag 290773 +security
> tag 293906 +pending
> merge 290773 293906
>
> Joey Hess wrote:
> >The new upstream release also fixes lots more security holes, which have
> >CAN numbers CAN-2004-1384 and CAN-2004-1383. Please reference all three
> >CAN numbers in your changelog.
>
Package: qtparted
Version: 0.4.4-3
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
qtparted depends on libparted1.6-0, which is not available in unstable.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel:
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 23:55:25 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 02:17:14PM -0500, Mike Furr wrote:
> Package: libzip-ocaml-dev
> Version: 1.01-13
> Severity: grave
>
> Files /usr/lib/ocaml/3.08/zip/zip.cmxa and /usr/lib/ocaml/3.08/unix.cmxa
> make inconsistent assumptions over implementation Unix
>
> Although interesting enough, this o
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reopen 291542
Bug#291542: rcs: [source] warning: the use of `mktemp' is dangerous, better
use `mkstemp'
Bug reopened, originator not changed.
> severity 291542 grave
Bug#291542: rcs: [source] warning: the use of `mktemp' is dangerous, better
use `m
Package: perlpanel
Version: 1:0.9.0-2
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
I just installed perlpanel on a machine without Gnome or similar stuff, in
particular a machine without hicolor-icon-theme installed. When starting up
perlpanel I just get the following error message, and
Your message dated Sun, 06 Feb 2005 18:17:25 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#293281: fixed in squirrelmail 2:1.4.4-3
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
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> retitle 292570 [hppa][2005week3][install report] installer in sarge unusable
> on HPPA
Bug#292570: installer in sarge - unusable on HPPA
Changed Bug title.
> severity 292570 grave
Bug#292570: [hppa][2005week3][install report] installer in sarge unusab
Ok, so I saw the new email to this bug and downloaded the
upstream 0.9.2 version and tried that.
It still fails in cpu detection, this time the
error message _is_ printed and it says:
Error : cannot open '/home/bjb/.pmk/pmkcpu.dat' : No such file or directory.
Error : failure in cpu detection.
E
severity 293937 important
severity 293935 normal
thanks
On Sunday 06 February 2005 05:25 pm, Sam Morris wrote:
> Package: aptitude
> Version: 0.3.1-4
> Severity: grave
> Tags: experimental
> Justification: security hole
Please try to exercise a little judgement about severity levels...if this i
severity 293937 important
severity 293935 normal
thanks
On Sunday 06 February 2005 05:25 pm, Sam Morris wrote:
> Package: aptitude
> Version: 0.3.1-4
> Severity: grave
> Tags: experimental
> Justification: security hole
Please try to exercise a little judgement about severity levels...if this i
On Sunday 06 February 2005 05:25 pm, Sam Morris wrote:
> Although running an update in the GUI does throw up a warning if a
> package repository could not be verified, there is no later warning if
> the user attempts to install a package from an unverified repository.
It seems to work fine for m
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 293937 important
Bug#293937: aptitude: apt-secure features not enabled
Severity set to `important'.
> severity 293935 normal
Bug#293935: aptitude: Segfault when pressing '?'
Severity set to `normal'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please
Your message dated Sun, 06 Feb 2005 17:17:30 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#290773: fixed in phpgroupware 0.9.16.005-1
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
It seems the problem (for a fresh install) is that
the call to parse_cpu_data fails because the file
/usr/local/share/pmk/pmkcpu.dat does not exist on
a fresh install. (Why is the error message that
says "the file does not exist" commented out?)
I don't know how you want to fix this (create th
Package: aptitude
Version: 0.3.1-4
Severity: grave
Tags: experimental
Justification: security hole
Aptitude does not seem to use the features of apt 0.6 (aka apt-secure).
Although running an update in the GUI does throw up a warning if a
package repository could not be verified, there is no later
Your message dated Sun, 06 Feb 2005 17:17:30 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#290773: fixed in phpgroupware 0.9.16.005-1
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
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 23:27:41 +0100
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line fixed
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
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tag 290773 +security
Bug#290773: phpgroupware: forum, polls, preferences, projects, tts, wiki: HTML
and SQL insertio
Tags were: pending
Tags added: security
> tag 293906 +pending
Bug#293906: multiple security holes (CAN-2004-1385)
Tags were: security
tag 290773 +security
tag 293906 +pending
merge 290773 293906
Joey Hess wrote:
The new upstream release also fixes lots more security holes, which have
CAN numbers CAN-2004-1384 and CAN-2004-1383. Please reference all three
CAN numbers in your changelog.
Sorry, I'm just doing an upload as I'm checki
Your message dated Sun, 06 Feb 2005 16:47:24 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#293568: fixed in gtk+2.0 2.6.2-2
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 yo
Package: python
Severity: serious
The license for the Python profiler[0] does not allow it to be copied or
modified independently of other Python programs. This is a violation of
DFSG #3 (and also is just stupid). This bug affects likely every version
of Python in Debian (and that ever was in Debi
severity 293924 normal
thanks
On Sun, 2005-02-06 at 21:59 +0100, tahiti_bob wrote:
> Package: ifp-line
> Version: 0.2.4.5-1
> Severity: grave
> Justification: renders package unusable
If you can use it as root, the package is still usable; it also still
works fine here with a 380-T.
> ifp ls giv
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 293924 normal
Bug#293924: ifp-line: ifp does not work when not root
Severity set to `normal'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs d
Package: debpartial-mirror
Version: 0.2.10
Followup-For: Bug #263783
version 0.2.10 of debpartial-mirror seems to work ok with sarge.
it would be useful to have in sarge, even if it has some unreported bugs.
would you consider closing this bug?
live well,
vagrant
-- System Information:
Debia
On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 09:59:33PM +0100, tahiti_bob wrote:
> Package: ifp-line
> Version: 0.2.4.5-1
> Severity: grave
> Justification: renders package unusable
>
> ifp ls gives the following message when not root
> Device is busy. (I was unable to claim its interface.)
> It works perfectly a
Package: ifp-line
Version: 0.2.4.5-1
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
ifp ls gives the following message when not root
Device is busy. (I was unable to claim its interface.)
It works perfectly as root.
I have installed pmp-common and add my user to plugdev -> no result
severity 293889 normal
--
> On fresh installation postfix _silently_ does not write alias for root.
> That is, it installs with /etc/aliases like
If /etc/aliases exists at install time, then it is left untouched, since
the admin obviously has what he wants there. Your /etc/aliases is not
from a
Hm... Thanks for build test of "all" packages. These are good
regression test on the TeX related tools :-)
If there is build error in Chinese (Simplified), there are few possible
root causes:
* something chenged in TEX/LATEX (Build system)
* I accidentaly broke some text encoding somewhere re
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 293889 normal
Bug#293889: postfix: Fresh installation does not write alias for root
Severity set to `normal'.
> --
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, D
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 14:59:34 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line dpkg correctly does not reinstall conffiles if they are
missing.
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
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 14:59:34 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line dpkg correctly does not reinstall conffiles if they are
missing.
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
The new upstream release also fixes lots more security holes, which have
CAN numbers CAN-2004-1384 and CAN-2004-1383. Please reference all three
CAN numbers in your changelog.
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Package: isoqlog
Version: 2.2-0.2
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
the recent isoqlog upgrade is uninstallable on my system. I get as far
as answering the debconf questions, then it enters an infinite loop.
I purged the package and tried a fresh install, with the same prob
Package: squid
Version: 2.5.7-4
Severity: grave
Tags: security
CAN-2005-0174 describes some security holes in squid:
Squid 2.5 up to 2.5.STABLE7 allows remote attackers to poison the cache or
conduct certain attacks via headers that do not follow the HTTP specification,
including (1) multip
Your message dated Sun, 06 Feb 2005 14:35:07 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#293834: fixed in quodlibet 0.8.1-1
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
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 293110 kvim
Bug#293110: kvim: Occupies 90-100% CPU as it auto resizes horozontally in KDE
3.3.2
Bug reassigned from package `kde' to `kvim'.
> severity 293110 important
Bug#293110: kvim: Occupies 90-100% CPU as it auto resizes horozontally in
Package: phpgroupware
Version: 0.9.16.003-1
Severity: grave
Tags: security
CAN-2004-1385 describes multiple security holes in phpgroupware:
phpGroupWare 0.9.16.003 and earlier allows remote attackers to gain sensitive
information via (1) unexpected characters in the session ID such as shell
Package: libzip-ocaml-dev
Version: 1.01-13
Severity: grave
Files /usr/lib/ocaml/3.08/zip/zip.cmxa and /usr/lib/ocaml/3.08/unix.cmxa
make inconsistent assumptions over implementation Unix
Although interesting enough, this only occurs with the native code, not
byte code.
:-(
-- System Information
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:43:34 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:30:57 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:42:24 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:30:57 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:56:25 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:58:11 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:57:44 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:50:54 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:52:36 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:52:36 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 06 Feb 2005 13:47:20 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#292282: fixed in mdadm 1.9.0-1
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 your
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:42:24 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:30:57 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 06 Feb 2005 13:47:20 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#293406: fixed in mdadm 1.9.0-1
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 your
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:32:38 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:34:27 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:37:02 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 06 Feb 2005 13:32:39 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#293091: fixed in lirc 0.7.1pre1-2
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 y
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:38:17 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:47:07 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:41:27 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Package: firehol
Version: 1.214-3
Severity: grave
Tags: security
I'm afraid that recent fixes still missed some unsafe temporary
directory uses in firehol. In firehol-lib.sh I see:
${CAT_CMD} /proc/config >/tmp/kcfg.$$
Upstream patched this here:
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/fir
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:30:57 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 06 Feb 2005 13:32:17 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#221338: fixed in jed 0.99.16-4
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
Your message dated Sun, 06 Feb 2005 13:32:17 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#239186: fixed in jed 0.99.16-4
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
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:35:48 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:30:57 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:37:40 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:43:34 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:31:41 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed from Debian
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
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:44:02 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:33:26 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:36:34 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:41:27 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:42:48 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:43:09 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:35:08 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:48:17 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:47:27 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:49:08 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity #271033 important
Bug#271033: mdadm - is not able to properly assemble multipath device
Severity set to `important'.
> stop
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(adminis
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:30:03 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:27:39 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:28:49 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
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 th
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:25:57 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line lsbdev removed
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 re
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:25:57 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line lsbdev removed
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 re
Your message dated Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:25:57 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line lsbdev removed
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 re
1 - 100 of 143 matches
Mail list logo
