Bug#582522: Whoops - this bug is still valid

2011-03-05 Thread Bill Allombert
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 02:19:37PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 01:48:52PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > >On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 01:21:14PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > >>reopen 582522 > >>thanks > >> > >>Whoops - this bug is still valid: ghostscript linking change

Bug#582522: Whoops - this bug is still valid

2011-02-18 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 01:48:52PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 01:21:14PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: reopen 582522 thanks Whoops - this bug is still valid: ghostscript linking change affct the relevancy of this bug but do not solve it. I do not understand. You re

Bug#582522: Whoops - this bug is still valid

2011-02-18 Thread Bill Allombert
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 01:21:14PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > reopen 582522 > thanks > > Whoops - this bug is still valid: ghostscript linking change affct > the relevancy of this bug but do not solve it. I do not understand. You reported this bug that request the creation of new libjpeg/li

Bug#582522: Whoops - this bug is still valid

2011-02-18 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
reopen 582522 thanks Whoops - this bug is still valid: ghostscript linking change affct the relevancy of this bug but do not solve it. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reus