Re: mesag3 <-> xlibmesa-gl / libgl1-mesa-dri <-> xlibmesa-dri / libglu1-mesa <-> libglu1-xorg

[Marcelo E. Magallon]

On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 12:07:46PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:

 > Sorry, I've really just not had any time recently, and there are some
 > things I wanted to clean up before I fired off to you (e.g. the
 > Build-Dep on glut, which introduced horrible Build-Deps and other
 > hilarity which meant that the Arch: all build *had* to come last,
 > etc).  I'll try to get it to you this week.

 Oh, you got me there.

 On GLUT?  I didn't spot that one.  The demos depend on GLUT, but I
 haven't updated those yet.

 But don't rush, I was just wondering if the email got lost :-)

 Please do check the 6.3.2 packages, I suspect we have fixed the same
 things each on our own.  I introduced another of those .map hacks for
 the drivers.  I also tried to make it easier to disable building some
 of the targets, guessing that other distros aren't interested in the
 more exotic ones.

-- 
Marcelo


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: mesag3 <-> xlibmesa-gl / libgl1-mesa-dri <-> xlibmesa-dri / libglu1-mesa <-> libglu1-xorg

[Marcelo E. Magallon]

On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 10:35:55PM -0400, Michel Dänzer wrote:

 > >  > Is this an attempt to smooth the transition from the xorg
 > >  > packages to the mesa ones and in the course of the X
 > >  > modularisation to get completely rid of the GL/GLU code in xorg
 > >  > (and the libgl*-xorg packages) and use mesa directly as an
 > >  > external library?  If there is such a transition how will it
 > >  > take place?
 > > 
 > >  Not currently, or at least not one that I know of.
 > 
 > X.Org will indeed no longer ship copies of the Mesa bits as of 7.0.
 > That'll be an automatic transition so to speak. :)

 For that to happen we just need to figure out how the drivers interact
 with each other (I mean the DRI bits in the X server with the
 client-side DRI bits shipped by Mesa 6.3).

 > >  2) Someone with the proper hardware should test the several
 > > (there's at least 8 of them IIRC) drivers that ship inside the
 > > -dri package with the current (6.8) and future (6.9, 7.0) x.org
 > > server.
 > 
 > I'll gladly test the r200 driver once it's built on powerpc and the
 > libgl1 issue mentioned above is solved.

 Can you just try the drivers?  I mean "dpkg -x" or something like that.
 I just need to know if they work fine with the current X server in
 unstable or if I need to wait for the 6.9 X server.

 The reason I ask this is because the mesa packages take some time to
 build (~ 30 minutes on my PC and I really don't want to know how long
 on other architectures), so I'd prefer to make as few uploads as
 possible.  I have already spotted a couple of problems with the -1
 release.

 SVN is svn://svn.debian.org/svn/pkg-mesa/mesa/trunk and patches are
 most welcomed (BTS is easier, but my @d.o address should be fine).

 And since I've got your attention Michel, if you figure there's an
 optimization for PowerPC that actually has some visible impact, I'll be
 glad to include that, too.  Please read debian/README.build.

 I really wish I had a PowerPC where I could port the optimized T&L
 functions, PowerPC asm is *really* nice :-)

 That goes for the AMD64 folk, too.

 > And you've been doing a great job, keep it up. But if you could use a
 > helping hand, I wouldn't mind co-maintaining or something. No
 > request, just an offer.

 Since Mesa suddenly includes a lot more drivers that I can't test, I'd
 really appreciate even a heads up "it's working fine with ".

 And co-maintaining is always welcomed.

-- 
Marcelo


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: mesag3 <-> xlibmesa-gl / libgl1-mesa-dri <-> xlibmesa-dri / libglu1-mesa <-> libglu1-xorg

[Michel Dänzer]

On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 17:25 -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 02:41:05AM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> 
>  The GLU package is, uhm, I don't know.  At some point I talked with
>  Branden about it, but we never did anything.  The xfree86 (and now the
>  x.org) are the ones duplicating that code.  And this has nothing to do
>  with some "my turf/your turf" thing.  It was more of a "this code
>  works, that code doesn't" thing.  All three packages (libglu1-mesa,
>  libglu1-xorg, xlibmesa-glu) are optional.  The -xorg thing is cute, but
>  someone missed the point of -mesa (and I'm probably to blame).  -mesa
>  is there because at some point there were two implementations shipped
>  with Mesa.  The one by Brian Paul and the one from the OpenGL SI
>  provided by SGI, so there were two packages (libglu1-mesa and
>  libglu1-sgi).  The -sgi one was provided by a package that never made
>  it thru the NEW queue and after some months I got sick of waiting and
>  removed the package from the queue, so it never actually made it to the
>  archive.  Anyways, it happened that at some other point Brian removed
>  his implementation, fixed bugs in the SGI one and shipped that with
>  Mesa.  That's why nowadays the -mesa package provides the SGI
>  implementation.
> 
>  AFAIK, the -xorg package is byte for byte the same thing as the -mesa
>  package.

And I've suggested getting rid of xlibmesa-glu{,-dbg,-dev} several
times, without success. However, this will happen automatically with
X.Org 7.0, see below.


>  > Why this duplication of code and which of this two implementations is
>  > the preferred one?
> 
>  "It depends"
> 
>  What hardware do you have and what do you want to do?
> 
>  On some machines I have NVIDIA hardware because it's the only hardware
>  that supports current OpenGL features both in the hardware and in its
>  driver (a recent Radeon card is useless to me if it supports OpenGL 1.5
>  but its driver doesn't, which is the case with the DRI drivers).

There's a vendor provided driver for these cards that supports
current OpenGL features as well.


>  > Could I replace the xorg packages with the mesa packages without ill
>  > effects resp. without loss of functionality?
> 
>  You mean replacing xlibmesa-gl by libgl1-mesa-dri?  It should work, but
>  haven't tested it.

It would have to Conflicts-Replaces-Provides libgl1 for that to work.


>  > Is this an attempt to smooth the transition from the xorg packages to
>  > the mesa ones and in the course of the X modularisation to get
>  > completely rid of the GL/GLU code in xorg (and the libgl*-xorg
>  > packages) and use mesa directly as an external library?  If there is
>  > such a transition how will it take place?
> 
>  Not currently, or at least not one that I know of.

X.Org will indeed no longer ship copies of the Mesa bits as of 7.0.
That'll be an automatic transition so to speak. :)


>  2) Someone with the proper hardware should test the several (there's at
> least 8 of them IIRC) drivers that ship inside the -dri package with
> the current (6.8) and future (6.9, 7.0) x.org server.

I'll gladly test the r200 driver once it's built on powerpc and the
libgl1 issue mentioned above is solved.


>  My interest in the mesa package comes from the fact that I develop
>  OpenGL-based applications, which is why I picked it up when it was
>  orphaned and why I've been maintaining it for the last few years.

And you've been doing a great job, keep it up. But if you could use a
helping hand, I wouldn't mind co-maintaining or something. No request,
just an offer.


-- 
Earthling Michel Dänzer  | Debian (powerpc), X and DRI developer
Libre software enthusiast|   http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=daenzer

Re: mesag3 <-> xlibmesa-gl / libgl1-mesa-dri <-> xlibmesa-dri / libglu1-mesa <-> libglu1-xorg

[Daniel Stone]

On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 17:25 -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
>  Daniel also said he'd send a package via email which I never got, so I
>  went ahead and did my own thing.  (No Matt, I'm not happy with the idea
>  of fishing patches out of some random, cluttered, and very unusable
>  webpage; everything I've fixed in Mesa over the years has found its way
>  to Brian Paul in the format he wants it over the channels he wants it,
>  so I expect the same from my downstreams).

Sorry, I've really just not had any time recently, and there are some
things I wanted to clean up before I fired off to you (e.g. the
Build-Dep on glut, which introduced horrible Build-Deps and other
hilarity which meant that the Arch: all build *had* to come last, etc).
I'll try to get it to you this week.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: mesag3 <-> xlibmesa-gl / libgl1-mesa-dri <-> xlibmesa-dri / libglu1-mesa <-> libglu1-xorg

[Michael Biebl]

Thanks for your answers, Marcelo.

>  > I noticed that Ubuntu renamed mesag3->libglu1-mesa and
>  > xlibmesa-gl->libgl1-xorg.
> 
>  Hopefully libglu1-mesa is a typo on your side.  The driver provided by
>  mesag3 is a software rasterizer and the package *should* be named
>  something like libgl1-mesa-soft (or swr or whatever, something that at
>  least gives a hint about the type of driver it provides)

You're right. It's not libglu1-mesa but libgl1-mesa. While my Debian
unstable box still has a mesag3 package, a current Ubuntu Breezy only
has a package libgl1-mesa, which conflicts with mesag3 and provides the
virtual package mesag3. Same for xlibmesa-gl. This package was
renamed/replaced by libgl1-xorg and is now completely removed from
Ubuntu Breezy. It seems there were many renamings lastly in Ubuntu
Breezy(1):
mesag3->libgl1-mesa
xlibmesa-gl->libgl-xorg
xlibmesa-glu->libglu1
and new packages
libglu1-mesa providing libglu1
libgl1-mesa-dri providing libgl1-dri

x-window-system-core in Ubuntu Breezy now depends on
libgl1-mesa-dri/libgl1-mesa/libglu1-mesa while as in unstable it is
xlibmesa-dri/xlibmesa-gl/liblu1-xorg.
I got the impression that this is an attempt to get a consistent naming
scheme as a first step in order to prepare for the X11R6.9/X11R7.0
release. IIRC X11R6.9 and X11R7.0 will use an installed mesa package to
provide OpenGL functionality and will not need it's own copy of mesa
anymore.
Maybe I'm completely wrong and I only got confused a little bit by all
this package renamings lately.


Cherrs,
Michael

(1) I know that this is d-d and not the ubuntu m-l. It just seems that
the Ubuntu packages for X are slightly ahead of Debian and I just
wondered if Debian will take the same path.

-- 

E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.teco.edu/

TecO (Telecooperation Office) Vincenz-Priessnitz-Str.1
University of Karlsruhe 76131 Karlsruhe, Germany



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: mesag3 <-> xlibmesa-gl / libgl1-mesa-dri <-> xlibmesa-dri / libglu1-mesa <-> libglu1-xorg

[Marcelo E. Magallon]

On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 02:41:05AM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:

 > It seems that mesa (6.3.2) as well as xorg (6.8.2) both provide a
 > GL/GLU implemetation.

 If you look at:

 
http://packages.debian.org/cgi-bin/search_contents.pl?word=libGL.so.1&searchmode=searchfiles&case=sensitive&version=unstable&arch=i386

 You'll notice:

usr/X11R6/lib/debug/libGL.so.1  libdevel/xlibmesa-gl-dbg
usr/X11R6/lib/libGL.so.1libs/xlibmesa-gl
usr/lib/dbg/i686/mmx/cmov/libGL.so.1libs/libgl1-mesa-dbg
usr/lib/dbg/libGL.so.1  libs/libgl1-mesa-dbg
usr/lib/debug/libGL.so.1libdevel/xlibmesa-gl-dbg
usr/lib/i686/mmx/cmov/libGL.so.1libs/mesag3
usr/lib/libGL.so.1  libs/libgl1-mesa-dri,
x11/nvidia-glx [non-free],
libs/xlibmesa-gl,
libs/mesag3

 (I have to upload the fix for the dbg thing, it's in svn now)

 xlibmesa-gl provides the DRI drivers shipped with the X.org X-server.

 mesag3 provides the software rasterizer shipped with mesa.

 nvidia-glx provides the hardware-accelerated driver for NVIDIA
 hardware (a second package is needed to support older NVIDIA hardware)

 libgl1-mesa-dri provides the DRI drivers that have been incorporated
 into Mesa upstream and which were formerly distributed only with the
 X-server.

 The GLU package is, uhm, I don't know.  At some point I talked with
 Branden about it, but we never did anything.  The xfree86 (and now the
 x.org) are the ones duplicating that code.  And this has nothing to do
 with some "my turf/your turf" thing.  It was more of a "this code
 works, that code doesn't" thing.  All three packages (libglu1-mesa,
 libglu1-xorg, xlibmesa-glu) are optional.  The -xorg thing is cute, but
 someone missed the point of -mesa (and I'm probably to blame).  -mesa
 is there because at some point there were two implementations shipped
 with Mesa.  The one by Brian Paul and the one from the OpenGL SI
 provided by SGI, so there were two packages (libglu1-mesa and
 libglu1-sgi).  The -sgi one was provided by a package that never made
 it thru the NEW queue and after some months I got sick of waiting and
 removed the package from the queue, so it never actually made it to the
 archive.  Anyways, it happened that at some other point Brian removed
 his implementation, fixed bugs in the SGI one and shipped that with
 Mesa.  That's why nowadays the -mesa package provides the SGI
 implementation.

 AFAIK, the -xorg package is byte for byte the same thing as the -mesa
 package.

 > IIRC the xorg GL/GLU code is based on (older) mesa code.

 Mesa is merged every now and then into the X tree.  For example the 6.3
 release has been merged into the 6.9 X.org tree.  But in *general* Mesa
 contains code that's newer than whatever is in the X tree.

 > Why this duplication of code and which of this two implementations is
 > the preferred one?

 "It depends"

 What hardware do you have and what do you want to do?

 On some machines I have NVIDIA hardware because it's the only hardware
 that supports current OpenGL features both in the hardware and in its
 driver (a recent Radeon card is useless to me if it supports OpenGL 1.5
 but its driver doesn't, which is the case with the DRI drivers).

 On other machines I have some Intel embedded POS, which can use the
 Mesa drivers.  I haven't had the chance to actually test the
 libgl1-mesa-dri with the X.org xserver packages, but as far as I can
 see from the docs, it should work.  Be my guest and beat me to it if
 you want.

 And on some situations I actually *want* the Mesa software rasterizer,
 which I use by installing the GL driver to an adecuate location and
 setting LD_LIBRARY_PATH accordingly.

 > Could I replace the xorg packages with the mesa packages without ill
 > effects resp. without loss of functionality?

 You mean replacing xlibmesa-gl by libgl1-mesa-dri?  It should work, but
 haven't tested it.

 If it works, it should gain functionality, not lose it.

 Performance is something else :-]

 > I noticed that Ubuntu renamed mesag3->libglu1-mesa and
 > xlibmesa-gl->libgl1-xorg.

 Hopefully libglu1-mesa is a typo on your side.  The driver provided by
 mesag3 is a software rasterizer and the package *should* be named
 something like libgl1-mesa-soft (or swr or whatever, something that at
 least gives a hint about the type of driver it provides)

 Daniel approached me about renaming and I told him that I didn't have a
 strong position in either way (renaming or not renaming).  In general I
 avoid cosmetic package renames, which is what this is.  I mean, there's
 hardly enough people around who even remember why mesag3 is called
 that, and there's less people around who can actually argue for a name
 change with something not cosmetic (and no, your "policy says so" card
 isn't good enough, since my "upgrade path" one be

Bug#324474: marked as done (missing dependancy for libxres-dev)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:47 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#324474: fixed in xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6
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; 22 Aug 2005 10:01:10 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Aug 22 03:01:10 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from a168.apm.etc.tu-bs.de [134.169.172.168] (Debian-exim)
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1E7978-0004X1-00; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 03:01:10 -0700
Received: from michael by a168.apm.etc.tu-bs.de with local (Exim 4.50)
id 1E7977-0007RD-BO
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 12:01:09 +0200
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 12:01:09 +0200
From: Michael Olbrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: missing dependancy for libxres-dev
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE 
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02

Package: libxres-dev
Version: 6.8.2.dfsg.1-5

libxres-dev contains link:
/usr/X11R6/lib/libXRes.so -> libXRes.so.1

libXRes.so.1 is in package libxres1
but libxres-dev does not depend on libxres1.

# dpkg -S usr/X11R6/lib/libXRes.so
libxres-dev: /usr/X11R6/lib/libXRes.so
libxres1: /usr/X11R6/lib/libXRes.so.1
libxres1: /usr/X11R6/lib/libXRes.so.1.0

# dpkg --status libxres-dev
Package: libxres-dev
Status: install ok installed
Priority: optional
Section: libdevel
Installed-Size: 324
Maintainer: Debian X Strike Force 
Architecture: i386
Source: xorg-x11
Version: 6.8.2.dfsg.1-5
Replaces: xlibs-dev (<< 4.3.0), xlibs-static-dev (<< 6.8.1-0ubuntu1)
Conflicts: xlibs-dev (<< 4.3.0), xlibs-static-dev (<< 6.8.1-0ubuntu1)
Description: X Window System resource measurement library development files
 Header files and a static version of the XRes library are provided by this
 package.
 .
 See the libxres1 package for more information.


---
Received: (at 324474-close) by bugs.debian.org; 31 Aug 2005 21:08:58 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 31 14:08:58 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from katie by spohr.debian.org with local (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1EAZjL-0005ZP-00; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:47 -0700
From: David Nusinow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.56 $
Subject: Bug#324474: fixed in xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:47 -0700
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER 
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 9

Source: xorg-x11
Source-Version: 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
xorg-x11, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

lbxproxy_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/lbxproxy_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdmx-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdmx1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdmx1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdps-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdps-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdps1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdps1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdps1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdps1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libfs-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libfs-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libfs6-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libfs6-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libfs6_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libfs6_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libglu1-xorg-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libglu1-xorg-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libglu1-xorg-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libglu1-xorg-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
li

Bug#325150: marked as done (xorg-x11: [INTL:pt_BR] Updated Brazilian Portuguese debconf template translation)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:47 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#325150: fixed in xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6
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; 26 Aug 2005 12:22:05 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Aug 26 05:22:05 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from 200-171-6-135.dsl.telesp.net.br (foolish.homelab.net) 
[200.171.6.135] 
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1E8dDg-00082o-00; Fri, 26 Aug 2005 05:22:05 -0700
Received: by foolish.homelab.net (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id C9BB693B7F; Fri, 26 Aug 2005 09:22:10 -0300 (BRT)
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===1107020346=="
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Andre Luis Lopes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: xorg-x11: [INTL:pt_BR] Updated Brazilian Portuguese debconf template
 translation
X-Mailer: reportbug 3.16
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 09:22:10 -0300
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-l10n-portuguese@lists.debian.org
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-11.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE,
X_DEBBUGS_CC autolearn=ham version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02

This is a multi-part MIME message sent by reportbug.

--===1107020346==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Package: xorg-x11
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch l10n


Hello,

Please consider applying the attached patch to fix one last remaining
fuzzy in Brazilian Portuguese (pt_BR) debconf template translation.

Regards,


-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell:  /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.12.3
Locale: LANG=pt_BR, LC_CTYPE=pt_BR (charmap=ISO-8859-1) (ignored: LC_ALL set to 
pt_BR)

--===1107020346==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/x-po; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="pt_BR.po.patch"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Index: po/pt_BR.po
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
--- po/pt_BR.po (revis=C3=A3o 560)
+++ po/pt_BR.po (c=C3=B3pia de trabalho)
@@ -26,10 +26,10 @@
 #
 msgid ""
 msgstr ""
-"Project-Id-Version: xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-4\n"
+"Project-Id-Version: xorg-x11\n"
 "Report-Msgid-Bugs-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]"
 "POT-Creation-Date: 2005-08-03 11:55:14+0200\n"
-"PO-Revision-Date: 2005-08-02 18:52-0300\n"
+"PO-Revision-Date: 2005-08-26 09:19-0300\n"
 "Last-Translator: Andr=E9 Lu=EDs Lopes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>\n"
 "Language-Team: Debian-BR Project <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
rg>\n"
 "MIME-Version: 1.0\n"
@@ -571,10 +571,9 @@
 #. Type: multiselect
 #. Description
 #: ../xserver-xorg.templates:66
-#, fuzzy
 msgid "The bitmap, freetype, and type1 modules are all font rasterizers.=
"
 msgstr ""
-"Os m=F3dulos bitmap, fretype, type1 e xtt s=E3o todos m=F3dulos para de=
senho de "
+"Os m=F3dulos bitmap, fretype e type1 s=E3o todos m=F3dulos para desenho=
 de "
 "fontes."
=20
 #. Type: multiselect

--===1107020346==--

---
Received: (at 325150-close) by bugs.debian.org; 31 Aug 2005 21:08:59 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 31 14:08:59 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from katie by spohr.debian.org with local (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1EAZjL-0005ZV-00; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:47 -0700
From: David Nusinow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.56 $
Subject: Bug#325150: fixed in xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:47 -0700
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER 
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 12

Source: xorg-x11
Source-Version: 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6

We believe that th

Bug#325509: marked as done (xorg.conf refers to xkb/rules/xorg which is not provided)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:47 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#325509: fixed in xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6
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; 29 Aug 2005 04:38:49 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Aug 28 21:38:49 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from tibor.swiftdsl.com.au [202.154.92.226] 
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1E9bQ1-ph-00; Sun, 28 Aug 2005 21:38:49 -0700
Received: (qmail 26556 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2005 04:42:13 -
Received: from unknown (HELO [192.168.1.5]) ([218.214.3.240])
  (envelope-sender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
  by tibor.swiftdsl.com.au (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP
  for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 29 Aug 2005 04:42:13 -
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 14:38:40 +1000
From: James Ballantine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
User-Agent: Debian Thunderbird 1.0.6 (X11/20050802)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: xorg.conf refers to xkb/rules/xorg which is not provided
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE 
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02

Package: xserver-xorg
Version: 6.8.2.dfsg.1-5

After upgrading to xorg from Sarge's xfree86, I received the error 
message "error activating XKB configuration" in a popup on login. I was 
unable to switch virtual terminals using ctrl-alt-F1. The auto-generated 
xorg.conf had changed my Option XkbRules to "xorg", but 
/etc/X11/xkb/rules/xorg did not exist.
I upgraded to the latest xlibs which provides that file and the problem 
went away.

Suggested solution: xserver-xorg could depend on xlibs 6.8.2.dfsg.1-5.

I am using Debian unstable
Kernel 2.6.12.5 #0 Sun Aug 21 14:44:10 EST 2005 ppc GNU/Linux

---
Received: (at 325509-close) by bugs.debian.org; 31 Aug 2005 21:09:01 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 31 14:09:01 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from katie by spohr.debian.org with local (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1EAZjL-0005ZX-00; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:47 -0700
From: David Nusinow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.56 $
Subject: Bug#325509: fixed in xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:47 -0700
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER 
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 13

Source: xorg-x11
Source-Version: 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
xorg-x11, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

lbxproxy_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/lbxproxy_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdmx-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdmx1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdmx1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdps-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdps-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdps1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdps1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdps1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdps1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libfs-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libfs-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libfs6-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libfs6-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libfs6_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libfs6_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libglu1-xorg-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libglu1-xorg-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libglu1-xorg-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libglu1-xorg-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libglu1-xorg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libglu1-xorg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
li

Bug#324562: marked as done (libxaw7-dev: Should depend on libxp-dev (for imake-using packages))

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:47 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#324562: fixed in xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6
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; 22 Aug 2005 19:53:59 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Aug 22 12:53:59 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from (frobnitz.homelinux.net) [67.188.213.204] 
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1E7IMp-0001Xb-00; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 12:53:59 -0700
Received: from daniel by frobnitz.homelinux.net with local (Exim 4.52)
id 1E7IMm-0002ht-LI
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 12:53:56 -0700
From: Daniel Schepler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: libxaw7-dev: Should depend on libxp-dev (for imake-using packages)
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 12:53:55 -0700
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE 
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02

Package: libxaw7-dev
Version: 6.8.2.dfsg.1-5
Severity: normal

Several packages have started failing to build because the imake
config adds -lXp to the link line for libXaw7.  For example, from my
kterm build log:

...
rm -f kterm
gcc -m32 -o kterm -g -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing  -L/usr/X11R6/lib   button.o 
charproc.o cursor.o data.o input.o main.o menu.o misc.o 
screen.o scrollbar.o tabs.outil.o VTPrsTbl.o kanji_map.o
  TekPrsTbl.o Tekproc.o gset.o convert.o xim.o kinput2.o convlib.o  
-lXaw -lXmu -lXt -lSM -lICE -lXpm -lXp -lXext -lX11 -lncurses -lutil
/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lXp
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make[1]: *** [kterm] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/kterm-6.2.0'
make: *** [build-stamp] Error 2

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Shell:  /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.12-1-amd64-k8
Locale: LANG=en, LC_CTYPE=en (charmap=UTF-8) (ignored: LC_ALL set to 
en_US.UTF-8)

Versions of packages libxaw7-dev depends on:
ii  libc6-dev [libc-dev]  2.3.5-4GNU C Library: Development Librari
ii  libice-dev6.8.2.dfsg.1-5 Inter-Client Exchange library deve
ii  libsm-dev 6.8.2.dfsg.1-5 X Window System Session Management
ii  libx11-dev6.8.2.dfsg.1-5 X Window System protocol client li
ii  libxaw7   6.8.2.dfsg.1-5 X Athena widget set library
ii  libxext-dev   6.8.2.dfsg.1-5 X Window System miscellaneous exte
ii  libxmu-dev6.8.2.dfsg.1-5 X Window System miscellaneous util
ii  libxpm-dev6.8.2.dfsg.1-5 X pixmap library development files
ii  libxt-dev 6.8.2.dfsg.1-5 X Toolkit Intrinsics development f
ii  x-dev 6.8.2.dfsg.1-5 X protocol development files

libxaw7-dev recommends no packages.

-- no debconf information

-- 
Daniel Schepler  "Please don't disillusion me.  I
[EMAIL PROTECTED]haven't had breakfast yet."
 -- Orson Scott Card

---
Received: (at 324562-close) by bugs.debian.org; 31 Aug 2005 21:08:39 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 31 14:08:39 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from katie by spohr.debian.org with local (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1EAZjL-0005ZR-00; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:47 -0700
From: David Nusinow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.56 $
Subject: Bug#324562: fixed in xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:47 -0700
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER 
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 10

Source: xorg-x11
Source-Version: 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
xorg-x11, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive

Bug#323954: marked as done (updating x11-common)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:46 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#323954: fixed in xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6
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; 19 Aug 2005 12:59:36 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Aug 19 05:59:36 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from athene.wz-berlin.de [193.174.6.3] 
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1E66TA-0004vK-00; Fri, 19 Aug 2005 05:59:36 -0700
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=webmail.wz-berlin.de)
by athene.wz-berlin.de with esmtp (Exim 4.51)
id 1E66T8-0007DT-8L
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 19 Aug 2005 14:59:34 +0200
Received: from 84.190.175.21 (proxying for unknown)
(SquirrelMail authenticated user [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by webmail.wz-berlin.de with HTTP;
Fri, 19 Aug 2005 14:59:34 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: updating x11-common
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Debian Bug Tracking System" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Importance: Normal
Priority: normal
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 14:59:34 +0200 (CEST)
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.2 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE,
NO_REAL_NAME,PRIORITY_NO_NAME autolearn=no 
version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02

Package: x11-common
Version: 6.8.2.dfsg.1-5
Severity: important
Tags: experimental


dpkg: error at /var/cache/apt/archives/x11-common_6.8.2.dfsg.1-5_all.deb  
(--unpack)
usage error: replace_conffile_with_symlink_rollback() called with wrong
number of arguments;
 expected 2; got 1

so i downloaded this file manually and tried to install it,
but got the same error.

with regards

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell:  /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.10-npx.20050406
Locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (charmap=ISO-8859-15)

-- debconf information:
  x11-common/experimental_packages:


---
Received: (at 323954-close) by bugs.debian.org; 31 Aug 2005 21:08:41 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 31 14:08:41 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from katie by spohr.debian.org with local (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1EAZjK-0005ZJ-00; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:46 -0700
From: David Nusinow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.56 $
Subject: Bug#323954: fixed in xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:46 -0700
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER 
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 6

Source: xorg-x11
Source-Version: 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
xorg-x11, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

lbxproxy_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/lbxproxy_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdmx-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdmx1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdmx1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdps-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdps-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdps1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdps1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdps1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdps1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libfs-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libfs-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libfs6-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libfs6-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libfs6_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libfs6_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libglu1-xorg-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  t

Bug#323210: marked as done (libx11-dev: missing names in XPutImage.3x)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:46 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#323210: fixed in xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6
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; 15 Aug 2005 12:49:33 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Aug 15 05:49:33 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from ms-smtp-01.nyroc.rr.com [24.24.2.55] 
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1E4ePE-0001mc-00; Mon, 15 Aug 2005 05:49:32 -0700
Received: from andromeda (cpe-69-202-136-66.twcny.res.rr.com [69.202.136.66])
by ms-smtp-01.nyroc.rr.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id 
j7FCnSDX018981
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 15 Aug 2005 08:49:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from pryzbyj by andromeda with local (Exim 4.52)
id 1E4ePA-00071a-8n
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 15 Aug 2005 08:49:28 -0400
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2005 08:49:28 -0400
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: libx11-dev: missing names in XPutImage.3x
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
From: Justin Pryzby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE 
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02

Package: libx11-dev
Severity: normal
Version: 4.3.0.dfsg.1-14

This paragraph from XPutImage.3x is missing words.

   dest_image
 Specifies the destination image.  and are the
 ^^   ^
coordinates of the subimage or which are relative to the origin of the
   ^  ^
des- tination rectangle, specify its upper-left corner, and deter-
^  ^
mine where the subimage is placed in the destination image

---
Received: (at 323210-close) by bugs.debian.org; 31 Aug 2005 21:08:43 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 31 14:08:43 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from katie by spohr.debian.org with local (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1EAZjK-0005ZF-00; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:46 -0700
From: David Nusinow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.56 $
Subject: Bug#323210: fixed in xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:46 -0700
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER 
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 4

Source: xorg-x11
Source-Version: 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
xorg-x11, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

lbxproxy_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/lbxproxy_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdmx-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdmx1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdmx1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdps-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdps-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdps1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdps1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdps1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdps1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libfs-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libfs-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libfs6-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libfs6-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libfs6_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libfs6_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libglu1-xorg-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libglu1-xorg-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libglu1-xorg-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libglu1-xorg-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libglu1-xorg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libglu1-xorg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libice-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to p

Bug#323977: marked as done (Can't install xlibs_6.8.2.dfsg.1-5_all.deb)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:46 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#322920: fixed in xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6
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; 19 Aug 2005 15:44:10 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Aug 19 08:44:10 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from smtp1.belwue.de [129.143.2.12] 
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1E692P-00046L-00; Fri, 19 Aug 2005 08:44:09 -0700
Received: from p549E4640.dip.t-dialin.net (p549E4640.dip.t-dialin.net 
[84.158.70.64])
by smtp1.BelWue.DE with ESMTP id j7JFi7FR025188
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 19 Aug 2005 17:44:07 +0200 (MEST)
env-from ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Subject: Can't install xlibs_6.8.2.dfsg.1-5_all.deb
From: Wolfgang Hartter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 17:44:06 +0200
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by smtp1.BelWue.DE id 
j7JFi7FR025188
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE 
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02

Package: xlibs
Version: 4.3.0.dfsg.1-14

In Debian/sid I want to upgrade from 4.3.0 to
xlibs_6.8.2.dfsg.1-5_all.deb but get the following errors:

Die folgenden Pakete werden aktualisiert:
  xlibs
1 aktualisiert, 0 neu installiert, 0 zu entfernen und 0 nicht
aktualisiert.
Es m=FCssen noch 0B von 477kB Archiven geholt werden.
Nach dem Auspacken werden 430kB Plattenplatz zus=E4tzlich benutzt.
M=F6chten Sie fortfahren [J/n]?
(Lese Datenbank ... 135091 Dateien und Verzeichnisse sind derzeit
installiert.)
Vorbereiten zum Ersetzen von xlibs 4.3.0.dfsg.1-14
(durch .../xlibs_6.8.2.dfsg.1 -5_all.deb) ...
cp: ,,/etc/X11/xkb/rules/xfree86" und ,,/etc/X11/xkb/rules/xorg" sind
die gleich e Datei
dpkg: Fehler beim Bearbeiten
von /var/cache/apt/archives/xlibs_6.8.2.dfsg.1-5_al l.deb (--unpack):
 Unterprozess pre-installation script gab den Fehlerwert 1 zur=FCck
usage error: replace_conffile_with_symlink_rollback() called with wrong
   number of arguments; expected 2, got 1
Please report a bug in the postrm script of the xlibs package,
   version 6.8.2.dfsg.1-5 to the Debian Bug Tracking System.
   Include all messages above that mention the xlibs package.  Visit
    on the World Wide Web for
   instructions, read the file /usr/share/doc/debian/bug-reporting.txt
from
   the doc-debian package, or install the reportbug package and use the
   command of the same name to file a report.
dpkg: Fehler beim Aufr=E4umen:
 Unterprozess post-removal script gab den Fehlerwert 99 zur=FCck
Fehler traten auf beim Bearbeiten von:
 /var/cache/apt/archives/xlibs_6.8.2.dfsg.1-5_all.deb
E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)


--=20
Mit freundlichen Gr=FC=DFen
Wolfgang Hartter


---
Received: (at 322920-close) by bugs.debian.org; 31 Aug 2005 21:08:44 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 31 14:08:44 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from katie by spohr.debian.org with local (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1EAZjK-0005ZD-00; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:46 -0700
From: David Nusinow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.56 $
Subject: Bug#322920: fixed in xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:46 -0700
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER 
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 3

Source: xorg-x11
Source-Version: 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
xorg-x11, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

lbxproxy_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/lbxproxy_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x1

Bug#321641: marked as done (libfs-dev: Missing depends on packages providing needed header files)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:46 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#321641: fixed in xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6
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; 6 Aug 2005 16:22:52 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Aug 06 09:22:52 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from 219.red-62-57-224.user.auna.net (pulsar.hadrons.org) 
[62.57.224.219] 
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1E1RRk-0004J3-00; Sat, 06 Aug 2005 09:22:52 -0700
Received: from guillem by pulsar.hadrons.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
id 1E1RVr-0002zE-00
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sat, 06 Aug 2005 18:27:07 +0200
Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2005 19:22:47 +0300
From: Guillem Jover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: libfs-dev: Missing depends on packages providing needed header files
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
Sender: Guillem Jover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE 
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02

Package: libfs-dev
Version: 6.8.2.dfsg.1-4
Severity: serious

Some header files in this package include external headers from
other packages, but those are not listed in the Dependency field,
thus causing other packages to FTBFS.

  X11/fonts/FS.h:  #include 
  X11/fonts/FS.h:  #include 
  X11/fonts/FSlib.h:   #include 

  $ dpkg -S X11/fonts/fsmasks.h
  xlibs-static-dev: /usr/X11R6/include/X11/fonts/fsmasks.h
  $ dpkg -S X11/Xdefs.h
  x-dev: /usr/X11R6/include/X11/Xdefs.h
  $ dpkg -S X11/Xfuncproto.h
  x-dev: /usr/X11R6/include/X11/Xfuncproto.h

Please add the required packages (xlibs-static-dev and x-dev) in
the Depdency field, or if xlibs-static-dev is supposed to be phased
out, move the needed files (or just all files remaining under
"X11/fonts/") to libfs-dev.

thanks,
guillem

---
Received: (at 321641-close) by bugs.debian.org; 31 Aug 2005 21:08:45 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 31 14:08:45 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from katie by spohr.debian.org with local (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1EAZjK-0005ZB-00; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:46 -0700
From: David Nusinow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.56 $
Subject: Bug#321641: fixed in xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:46 -0700
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER 
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 2

Source: xorg-x11
Source-Version: 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
xorg-x11, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

lbxproxy_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/lbxproxy_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdmx-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdmx1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdmx1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdps-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdps-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdps1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdps1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdps1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdps1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libfs-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libfs-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libfs6-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libfs6-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libfs6_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libfs6_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libglu1-xorg-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libglu1-xorg-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libglu1-xorg-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libglu1-xorg-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libglu1-xorg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  

Bug#324275: marked as done (libxaw8-dev should depend on libxp-dev)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:47 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#324275: fixed in xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6
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; 21 Aug 2005 11:59:55 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Aug 21 04:59:55 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from mail.irb.hr [161.53.22.8] (UNKNOWN)
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1E6oUV-0001xo-00; Sun, 21 Aug 2005 04:59:55 -0700
Received: from diziet.irb.hr (diziet.irb.hr [161.53.22.31])
by mail.irb.hr (8.13.3/8.13.3/Debian-6) with ESMTP id j7LBxpoB013046
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sun, 21 Aug 2005 13:59:51 +0200
Received: from diziet.irb.hr (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by diziet.irb.hr (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-3) with ESMTP id j7LBxt2N001242
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sun, 21 Aug 2005 13:59:55 +0200
Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by diziet.irb.hr (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id j7LBxtQt001238
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sun, 21 Aug 2005 13:59:55 +0200
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 13:59:55 +0200
From: Matej Vela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: libxaw8-dev should depend on libxp-dev
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.10i
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.51 on 161.53.22.8
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.51 on 161.53.22.31
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE 
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02

Package: libxaw8-dev
Version: 6.8.2.dfsg.1-5

imake expands

LOCAL_LIBRARIES = XawClientLibs

into

-lXaw -lXmu -lXt -lSM -lICE -lXpm -lXp -lXext -lX11
  
making libxp-dev necessary for building Xaw applications.

(The other development packages are already listed in the dependencies.)

Thanks,

Matej

---
Received: (at 324275-close) by bugs.debian.org; 31 Aug 2005 21:08:57 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 31 14:08:57 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from katie by spohr.debian.org with local (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1EAZjL-0005ZN-00; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:47 -0700
From: David Nusinow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.56 $
Subject: Bug#324275: fixed in xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:47 -0700
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER 
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 8

Source: xorg-x11
Source-Version: 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
xorg-x11, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

lbxproxy_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/lbxproxy_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdmx-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdmx1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdmx1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdps-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdps-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdps1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdps1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdps1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdps1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libfs-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libfs-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libfs6-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libfs6-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libfs6_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libfs6_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libglu1-xorg-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libglu1-xorg-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libglu1-xorg-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libglu1-xorg-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libglu1-xorg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libglu1-xorg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libice-dev_6.8.

Bug#323954: marked as done (updating x11-common)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:46 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#322920: fixed in xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6
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; 19 Aug 2005 12:59:36 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Aug 19 05:59:36 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from athene.wz-berlin.de [193.174.6.3] 
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1E66TA-0004vK-00; Fri, 19 Aug 2005 05:59:36 -0700
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=webmail.wz-berlin.de)
by athene.wz-berlin.de with esmtp (Exim 4.51)
id 1E66T8-0007DT-8L
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 19 Aug 2005 14:59:34 +0200
Received: from 84.190.175.21 (proxying for unknown)
(SquirrelMail authenticated user [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by webmail.wz-berlin.de with HTTP;
Fri, 19 Aug 2005 14:59:34 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: updating x11-common
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Debian Bug Tracking System" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Importance: Normal
Priority: normal
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 14:59:34 +0200 (CEST)
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.2 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE,
NO_REAL_NAME,PRIORITY_NO_NAME autolearn=no 
version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02

Package: x11-common
Version: 6.8.2.dfsg.1-5
Severity: important
Tags: experimental


dpkg: error at /var/cache/apt/archives/x11-common_6.8.2.dfsg.1-5_all.deb  
(--unpack)
usage error: replace_conffile_with_symlink_rollback() called with wrong
number of arguments;
 expected 2; got 1

so i downloaded this file manually and tried to install it,
but got the same error.

with regards

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell:  /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.10-npx.20050406
Locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (charmap=ISO-8859-15)

-- debconf information:
  x11-common/experimental_packages:


---
Received: (at 322920-close) by bugs.debian.org; 31 Aug 2005 21:08:44 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 31 14:08:44 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from katie by spohr.debian.org with local (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1EAZjK-0005ZD-00; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:46 -0700
From: David Nusinow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.56 $
Subject: Bug#322920: fixed in xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:46 -0700
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER 
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 3

Source: xorg-x11
Source-Version: 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
xorg-x11, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

lbxproxy_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/lbxproxy_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdmx-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdmx1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdmx1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdps-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdps-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdps1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdps1-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdps1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libdps1_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libfs-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libfs-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libfs6-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libfs6-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libfs6_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/libfs6_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libglu1-xorg-dbg_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  t

Bug#323977: marked as done (Can't install xlibs_6.8.2.dfsg.1-5_all.deb)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:46 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#323954: fixed in xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6
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; 19 Aug 2005 15:44:10 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Aug 19 08:44:10 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from smtp1.belwue.de [129.143.2.12] 
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1E692P-00046L-00; Fri, 19 Aug 2005 08:44:09 -0700
Received: from p549E4640.dip.t-dialin.net (p549E4640.dip.t-dialin.net 
[84.158.70.64])
by smtp1.BelWue.DE with ESMTP id j7JFi7FR025188
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 19 Aug 2005 17:44:07 +0200 (MEST)
env-from ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Subject: Can't install xlibs_6.8.2.dfsg.1-5_all.deb
From: Wolfgang Hartter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 17:44:06 +0200
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by smtp1.BelWue.DE id 
j7JFi7FR025188
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE 
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02

Package: xlibs
Version: 4.3.0.dfsg.1-14

In Debian/sid I want to upgrade from 4.3.0 to
xlibs_6.8.2.dfsg.1-5_all.deb but get the following errors:

Die folgenden Pakete werden aktualisiert:
  xlibs
1 aktualisiert, 0 neu installiert, 0 zu entfernen und 0 nicht
aktualisiert.
Es m=FCssen noch 0B von 477kB Archiven geholt werden.
Nach dem Auspacken werden 430kB Plattenplatz zus=E4tzlich benutzt.
M=F6chten Sie fortfahren [J/n]?
(Lese Datenbank ... 135091 Dateien und Verzeichnisse sind derzeit
installiert.)
Vorbereiten zum Ersetzen von xlibs 4.3.0.dfsg.1-14
(durch .../xlibs_6.8.2.dfsg.1 -5_all.deb) ...
cp: ,,/etc/X11/xkb/rules/xfree86" und ,,/etc/X11/xkb/rules/xorg" sind
die gleich e Datei
dpkg: Fehler beim Bearbeiten
von /var/cache/apt/archives/xlibs_6.8.2.dfsg.1-5_al l.deb (--unpack):
 Unterprozess pre-installation script gab den Fehlerwert 1 zur=FCck
usage error: replace_conffile_with_symlink_rollback() called with wrong
   number of arguments; expected 2, got 1
Please report a bug in the postrm script of the xlibs package,
   version 6.8.2.dfsg.1-5 to the Debian Bug Tracking System.
   Include all messages above that mention the xlibs package.  Visit
    on the World Wide Web for
   instructions, read the file /usr/share/doc/debian/bug-reporting.txt
from
   the doc-debian package, or install the reportbug package and use the
   command of the same name to file a report.
dpkg: Fehler beim Aufr=E4umen:
 Unterprozess post-removal script gab den Fehlerwert 99 zur=FCck
Fehler traten auf beim Bearbeiten von:
 /var/cache/apt/archives/xlibs_6.8.2.dfsg.1-5_all.deb
E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)


--=20
Mit freundlichen Gr=FC=DFen
Wolfgang Hartter


---
Received: (at 323954-close) by bugs.debian.org; 31 Aug 2005 21:08:41 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Aug 31 14:08:41 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from katie by spohr.debian.org with local (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1EAZjK-0005ZJ-00; Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:46 -0700
From: David Nusinow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.56 $
Subject: Bug#323954: fixed in xorg-x11 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:02:46 -0700
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER 
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 6

Source: xorg-x11
Source-Version: 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
xorg-x11, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

lbxproxy_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x11/lbxproxy_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
libdmx-dev_6.8.2.dfsg.1-6_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xorg-x1

X Strike Force X.Org X11 SVN commit: r573 - trunk/debian

[X Strike Force SVN Repository Admin]

Author: dnusinow
Date: 2005-08-31 15:57:15 -0500 (Wed, 31 Aug 2005)
New Revision: 573

Modified:
   trunk/debian/changelog
Log:
Inaugurate 6.8.2.dfsg.1-7 changelog

Modified: trunk/debian/changelog
===
--- trunk/debian/changelog  2005-08-31 20:53:32 UTC (rev 572)
+++ trunk/debian/changelog  2005-08-31 20:57:15 UTC (rev 573)
@@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
+xorg-x11 (6.8.2.dfsg.1-6+SVN) unstable; urgency=low
+
+  * 
+
+ -- David Nusinow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  Wed, 31 Aug 2005 16:53:46 -0400
+
 xorg-x11 (6.8.2.dfsg.1-6) unstable; urgency=low
 
   [ Branden Robinson ]


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

X Strike Force X.Org X11 SVN commit: r572 - tags

[X Strike Force SVN Repository Admin]

Author: dnusinow
Date: 2005-08-31 15:53:32 -0500 (Wed, 31 Aug 2005)
New Revision: 572

Added:
   tags/6.8.2.dfsg.1-6/
Log:
Tag 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6 release


Copied: tags/6.8.2.dfsg.1-6 (from rev 571, trunk)


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

X Strike Force X.Org X11 SVN commit: r571 - trunk/debian

[X Strike Force SVN Repository Admin]

Author: dnusinow
Date: 2005-08-31 15:51:11 -0500 (Wed, 31 Aug 2005)
New Revision: 571

Modified:
   trunk/debian/changelog
Log:
Set changelog for 6.8.2.dfsg.1-6 release.


Modified: trunk/debian/changelog
===
--- trunk/debian/changelog  2005-08-31 12:56:50 UTC (rev 570)
+++ trunk/debian/changelog  2005-08-31 20:51:11 UTC (rev 571)
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-xorg-x11 (6.8.2.dfsg.1-5+SVN) UNRELEASED; urgency=low
+xorg-x11 (6.8.2.dfsg.1-6) unstable; urgency=low
 
   [ Branden Robinson ]
   * Increment versioning of build-conflict with linux-kernel-headers to (<<
@@ -101,7 +101,7 @@
 (closes: #322920, #323954).
   * debian/control
 
- -- David Martínez Moreno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  Tue, 30 Aug 2005 11:41:51 +0200
+ -- David Nusinow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  Wed, 31 Aug 2005 08:57:21 -0400
 
 xorg-x11 (6.8.2.dfsg.1-5) unstable; urgency=low
 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#325882: xorg-x11: FTBFS on hurd-i386: DRI issues in drivers/i810

[Michael Banck]

Package: xorg-x11
Version: 6.8.2.dfsg.1-5
Severity: important
Tags: patch

Hi,

another build failure due to improper handling of DRI, while linking the
static debug Xorg:

/build/mbanck/xorg-x11-6.8.2.dfsg.1/build-tree/xc-xserver-xorg-dbg/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/i810/i830_driver.c:3323:
undefined reference to `I810shadowFBSymbols'
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make[4]: *** [Xorg] Error 1

This had been filed as #3850 upstream and since fixed in CVS.  The patch
from CVS is attached (named #808 cause I got some other patches queued
up I need to test some more, feel free to renumber)


cheers,

Michael
2005-07-26 Alan Hourihane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

* programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/i810/i810_driver.c
Bug #3850: 
Fix non-DRI builds.

===
RCS file: /cvs/xorg/xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/i810/i810_driver.c,v
rcsdiff: /cvs/xorg/xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/i810/i810_driver.c,v: 
warning: Unknown phrases like `commitid ...;' are present.
retrieving revision 1.20
retrieving revision 1.21
diff -u -r1.20 -r1.21
--- xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/i810/i810_driver.c   2005/07/11 
02:29:51 1.20
+++ xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/i810/i810_driver.c   2005/07/26 
08:07:37 1.21
@@ -272,6 +272,11 @@
NULL
 };
 
+const char *I810shadowFBSymbols[] = {
+"ShadowFBInit",
+NULL
+};
+
 #ifdef XF86DRI
 const char *I810drmSymbols[] = {
"drmAddBufs",
@@ -313,13 +318,6 @@
NULL
 };
 
-#ifdef XF86DRI
-
-const char *I810shadowFBSymbols[] = {
-"ShadowFBInit",
-NULL
-};
-
 const char *I810shadowSymbols[] = {
 "shadowInit",
 "shadowSetup",
@@ -327,9 +325,7 @@
 NULL
 };
 
-#endif
-
-#endif /* I830_ONLY */
+#endif 
 
 #ifndef I810_DEBUG
 int I810_DEBUG = (0

6.8 FTBFS = Brown Paper Bag

[David Nusinow]

Hi all,
   It turns out that the reason why 6.8 -6 packages were FTBFS'ing for me
was because I had 6.9rc0 installed and had been too lazy to use pbuilder.
I'm building the current trunk now and I'll upload in a few hours when it's
finished and I've done some basic testing. Sorry everyone!

 - David Nusinow


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#325867: XFree memory leaks?

[Anton]

Package: xserver-xfree86
Version: 4.3.0.dfsg.1-14

 PID USER  PR  NI  VIRT  RES  SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+  COMMAND
 3293 root  15   0  295m 219m  82m S  3.0 43.6  16:16.68 XFree86

Debian Sarge

X Strike Force X.Org X11 SVN commit: r570 - trunk/debian

[X Strike Force SVN Repository Admin]

Author: dnusinow
Date: 2005-08-31 07:56:50 -0500 (Wed, 31 Aug 2005)
New Revision: 570

Modified:
   trunk/debian/rules
Log:
Reorder SPECIAL_DEPENDS assignment in debian/rules so as to properly match
i386


Modified: trunk/debian/rules
===
--- trunk/debian/rules  2005-08-30 15:28:54 UTC (rev 569)
+++ trunk/debian/rules  2005-08-31 12:56:50 UTC (rev 570)
@@ -101,14 +101,16 @@
 #
 # $(XWSD_SPECIAL_DEPENDS) is used to add packages to the dependencies of
 # x-window-system-dev.
+# This first line must go first because findstring will match i386 subarches 
as # i386, so we must make sure it sees i386 last to set its variables correctly
+ifneq (,$(findstring $(ARCH),arm hppa hurd-i386 m68k mips mipsel netbsd-i386 
sh3 sh4))
+XWSC_SPECIAL_DEPENDS="xserver-xorg, "
+endif
+
 ifneq (,$(findstring $(ARCH),alpha amd64 i386 ia64 kfreebsd-i386 powerpc 
sparc))
 XWSC_SPECIAL_DEPENDS="xserver-xorg, xlibmesa-dri, "
 XWSD_SPECIAL_DEPENDS="xlibosmesa4-dbg, xlibosmesa-dev, "
 endif
 
-ifneq (,$(findstring $(ARCH),arm hppa hurd-i386 m68k mips mipsel netbsd-i386 
sh3 sh4))
-XWSC_SPECIAL_DEPENDS="xserver-xorg, "
-endif
 
 ifneq (,$(findstring $(ARCH),s390))
 NOT_BUILDING_XORG_X_SERVER=1


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Processed: Re: Processed: I forgot to bump the severity of #323977.

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

> reassign 323977 x11-common
Bug#323977: Can't install xlibs_6.8.2.dfsg.1-5_all.deb
Bug reassigned from package `xlibs' to `x11-common'.

> merge 323977 323954
Bug#323954: updating x11-common
Bug#323977: Can't install xlibs_6.8.2.dfsg.1-5_all.deb
Bug#322920: bug in the postrm script of the x11-common package
Merged 322920 323954 323977.

> 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]

Re: Processed: I forgot to bump the severity of #323977.

[David Martínez Moreno]

reassign 323977 x11-common
merge 323977 323954
thanks

El miércoles, 31 de agosto de 2005 10:33, Debian Bug Tracking System escribió:
[...]
> > merge 323977 323954
>
> Bug#323954: updating x11-common
> Bug#323977: Can't install xlibs_6.8.2.dfsg.1-5_all.deb
> Mismatch - only Bugs in same state can be merged:
> Values for `package' don't match:
>  #323954 has `x11-common';
>  #323977 has `xlibs'

Agh, I forgot to reassign #323977 to x11-common... :-(


Ender.
-- 
Uh, we had a slight weapons malfunction, but
 uh... everything's perfectly all right now. We're
 fine. We're all fine here now, thank you. How are you?
-- Han Solo (Star Wars).
--
Debian developer


pgpbx6KqzkU0c.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Bug#325733: Please add xvattr to xbase-clients

[Michael Schmitz]

> It should be packaged on its own (it's in Marillat's repository, IIRC),
> but certainly not in xbase-clients.

Why's that? xvinfo is also in xbase-clients.

Either way, it's not in the archive yet. I'd package it separately, just
don't want to step on anyone's toes.

Michael




-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Processed: I forgot to bump de severity of #323977.

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

> severity 323977 important
Bug#323977: Can't install xlibs_6.8.2.dfsg.1-5_all.deb
Severity set to `important'.

> merge 323977 323954
Bug#323954: updating x11-common
Bug#323977: Can't install xlibs_6.8.2.dfsg.1-5_all.deb
Mismatch - only Bugs in same state can be merged:
Values for `package' don't match:
 #323954 has `x11-common';
 #323977 has `xlibs'

> 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]