Bug#134758: Most popular medical goods.
Good afternoon. bro! Do you want to be a king of bed? You will forget about all ED problems. at the present day we want to offer you huge choice of medicines at the extremely low costs. Hurry up! http://bryogis.searchhappen.com/?266094038224 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#188235: catch .. 523
Want to meet with young girl or boy? Want to have sex with teens ? We will help you ! mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#89697: All ED difficultieshave already solved!
Hi. bro! Do you want to be a king of bed? You will forget about all ED problems. at the present day we want to offer you huge choice of medical products at the extremely low costs. Hurry up! http://aocyzfl.representbasic.net/?537949129115 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#445852: dpkg-buildpackage: fails with perl errors
All'incirca Mon, 8 Oct 2007 22:16:21 +0200, Frank Lichtenheld [EMAIL PROTECTED] sembrerebbe aver scritto: These don't look like perl errors, but like shell errors. Somehow the perl script gets executed as shell script. Do you have dpkg-cross installed? Hmm, but why does it happens? I have dpkg-cross installed, but I can't see what does this mean. Sorry, I'm not very expert with Perl! Giovanni. -- Giovanni Mascellani [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pisa, Italy Web: http://giomasce.altervista.org SIP: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG: 0x5F1FBF70 (FP: 1EB6 3D43 E201 4DDF 67BD 003F FCB0 BB5C 5F1F BF70) signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#445858: dpkg: Minor errors in man pages
Hello Frank, On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 10:28:05PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 06:43:57PM +0200, Helge Kreutzmann wrote: Here I am unsure, please verify: -shlibs.local, B/etc/dpkg/shlibs.override, the Bshlibs control area file +shlibs.local, B/etc/dpkg/shlibs.override, the Bshlibs area in the controle file shlibs control file is correct I think The word I had really problems with is area. For me area implies some space which is separated. shlibs control file area is still unclear to me. Could area may be dropped? -tarfile. If will use the directory to create the diff, but the tarfile to +tarfile. It will use the directory to create the diff, but the tarfile to It is more correct. Just writing dpkg-source is probably better. Yes, I also would prefer to spell it out, I just made the minimal patch necessary to get a sensible sentence. Once I'll see the changes applied, I'll update the German man pages accordingly (which probably will require few changes only). Greetings Helge -- Dr. Helge Kreutzmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dipl.-Phys. http://www.helgefjell.de/debian.php 64bit GNU powered gpg signed mail preferred Help keep free software libre: http://www.ffii.de/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#373003: [PATCH/RFC] deb-version.5: Add an own manpage for Dpkg's version format
Frank Lichtenheld writes ([PATCH/RFC] deb-version.5: Add an own manpage for Dpkg's version format): 1) If I would copy this text, who to credit for it? For now I just copied the copyright notice from Policy but I suspect that might not be the whole truth given how old it is. I haven't double-checked but I suspect it's pretty much the same text as I wrote all those years ago. 2) Should we really try to include more documentation of dpkg's behaviour in dpkg itself? (My answer is a clear yes to that) If yes, how do we avoid duplication with policy? After all we probably can't just delete such stuff from policy since there might be differences what dpkg supports and what policy allows. But not documenting dpkg features until they are allowed by Policy is not a good way either. Originally what is now the policy manual was two documents (both of which I wrote): * dpkg Programmers' Manual * Debian Policy Manual The former described the behaviour of dpkg, from a package maintainer's point of view, and documented the restrictions and requirements which are inherent in dpkg's behaviour. The latter described other decisions made by Debian which weren't direct consequences of the behaviour of dpkg. I wasn't there when it was decided to merge these, so I can't say for sure what the reasons were. Obviously before reversing this decision again it would be sensible to understand the reasons behind it, and to consider whether we agree with them and whether they still apply. Two obvious reasons I can think of are that it may have been felt confusing to maintainers to have to consult two documents, and that there may have been a desire to put the dpkg Programmers Manual into some kind of formal change process or at least to take it out of the hands of what were at the time the rather chaotic hands of the various dpkg maintainers. Personally I think merging this documents was a mistake and they should be separated again. However, others may disagree. Times have changed quite a bit. When these manuals were separate dpkg was the principal complex piece of code which handled packages. Now the higher-level tools like apt, archive management software, package tracking systems, etc. etc., all have reliance on the package format - so changing it isn't as simple as changing dpkg. On the other hand, the we need it in one place argument is less strong now, because nowadays we have a plethora of documents which a maintainer is expected to keep abreast of. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#445852: dpkg-buildpackage: fails with perl errors
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007, Giovanni Mascellani wrote: All'incirca Mon, 8 Oct 2007 22:16:21 +0200, Frank Lichtenheld [EMAIL PROTECTED] sembrerebbe aver scritto: These don't look like perl errors, but like shell errors. Somehow the perl script gets executed as shell script. Do you have dpkg-cross installed? Hmm, but why does it happens? I have dpkg-cross installed, but I can't see what does this mean. Sorry, I'm not very expert with Perl! It means that dpkg-cross diverted /usr/bin/dpkg-buildpackage and installed its own copy of that file. That copy reuses the original dpkg-buildpackage by sourcing it, and thus making the assumption that's it's written in shell. That assumption has been broken by the latest upload. So this is really a dpkg-cross bug. See http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/serendipity/index.php?/archives/54-dpkg-cross-2.0.0-fragility-expected!.html Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux : http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/
Bug#32595: Mlcro5oft + Ado6e t|tles as L0W as 1O$
S*ftware as |ow as 1O$. V1s1t. cheapxpsoft. com . for m0re deta1|s.. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#108587: Mlcro5oft + Ado6e t|tles as L0W as 1O$
S*ftware as |ow as 1O$. V1s1t. cheapxpsoft. com . for m0re deta1|s.. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: this assignment is broken
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: # this bug doesn't have anything to do with ri-li, but with dpkg reassign 445753 dpkg Bug#445753: ri-li-data: On installing changes uid Bug reassigned from package `ri-li-data' to `dpkg'. forcemerge 343578 445753 Bug#343578: dpkg: delete available-new when 'No space left on device' Bug#445753: ri-li-data: On installing changes uid Forcibly Merged 343578 445753. severity 445753 normal Bug#445753: ri-li-data: On installing changes uid Bug#343578: dpkg: delete available-new when 'No space left on device' Severity set to `normal' from `normal' thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Re: Processed: this assignment is broken
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: retitle 445753 dpkg: On installing changes uid Bug#445753: ri-li-data: On installing changes uid Changed Bug title to `dpkg: On installing changes uid' from `ri-li-data: On installing changes uid'. thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#60639: Mlcro5oft + Ado6e t|tles as L0W as 1O$
S*ftware as |ow as 1O$. V1s1t. cheapxpsoft. com . for m0re deta1|s.. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#445858: dpkg: Minor errors in man pages
On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 06:24:48PM +0200, Helge Kreutzmann wrote: On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 10:28:05PM +0200, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 06:43:57PM +0200, Helge Kreutzmann wrote: Here I am unsure, please verify: -shlibs.local, B/etc/dpkg/shlibs.override, the Bshlibs control area file +shlibs.local, B/etc/dpkg/shlibs.override, the Bshlibs area in the controle file shlibs control file is correct I think The word I had really problems with is area. For me area implies some space which is separated. shlibs control file area is still unclear to me. Could area may be dropped? That was what I meant. Sorry if that was unclear. Gruesse, -- Frank Lichtenheld [EMAIL PROTECTED] www: http://www.djpig.de/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
