>
> Which is inside #ifdef WIN32
>
Oops, didn't see that.
> > It compiles cleanly on my i386 box.
>
> Try upgrading to the latest version.
>
I am already running unstable with the latest gcc-4.0. There is no
problem here. Will try at home on another box.
Anyway, it doesn't look good. I will
reassign 323798 openmotif
thanks
* GOTO Masanori ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050819 02:37]:
> At Thu, 18 Aug 2005 15:56:19 +0200,
> Andreas Barth wrote:
> > during building openmotif on sparc, this error happened:
> >
> > gcc -g -O2 -Wall -Wno-unused -Wno-comment -o .libs/periodic periodic.o
> > ../..
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 323798 openmotif
Bug#323798: [sparc] corrupted double-linked list
Bug reassigned from package `glibc' to `openmotif'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(admi
Package: postgresql-plruby
Version: 0.4.3-1
Severity: serious
postgresql-plruby fails to build because the available
postgresql-dev's version is not less than 7.5:
> -> Considering postgresql-dev (<< 7.5)
> Tried versions: 7.5.8
>-> Does not satisfy version, not trying
> E: Could not
Package: prj2make-sharp
Version: 0.95-1.2
Severity: serious
prj2make-sharp fails to build because it cannot run dh_netdeps:
> dh_netdeps -d
> make: dh_netdeps: Command not found
--
Matt
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Package: libafterimage0
Version: 2.1.2-1
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
I received the following while updating:
---
Unpacking libafterimage0 (from .../libafterimage0_2.1.2-1_i386.deb) ...
dpkg: error processing /var/cache/apt/archives/libafterimage0_2.1.2-1_i386.d
Package: powermanga
Version: 0.79-3
Severity: serious
Tags: patch
powermanga fails to build because it cannot find -lXxf86dga:
> g++ -O3 -Wall -L/usr/lib -lSDL -lpthread -o powermanga
> powermanga-afficheEtoiles.o powermanga-bonus.o powermanga-caractere.o
> powermanga-chaine.o powermanga-con
Your message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 09:38:41 +0200 (CEST)
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line pdp: FTBFS (amd64/gcc-4.0): invalid storage class for function
'_map'
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt w
Marco Presi wrote in *December 2004*:
>aj> With the attached patch 'linesrv' can be compiled
>aj> on amd64 using gcc-4.0.
>
>[...]
>
>I will try it in the next days..
It's August 2005. Any progress?
--
This space intentionally left blank.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a
On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 09:49:43AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 09:53:00PM +0200, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > > Well, this is not related to ocaml-md5sums any longer, but to emacs.
> >
> > That is true, but your prerm script uses emacs, so your package has to
> >
On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 09:53:00PM +0200, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > Well, this is not related to ocaml-md5sums any longer, but to emacs.
>
> That is true, but your prerm script uses emacs, so your package has to
> (pre)depend on emacs or something.
I pointed out that the bug is not relate
Steve Langasek writes:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 08:03:38AM +0200, Kevin Glynn wrote:
> > Matt Kraai writes:
> > > Package: mozart
> > > Version: 1.3.1.20040616-8
> > > Severity: serious
> > >
> > > mozart fails to build because of two "too few
> > > template-parameter-lists" errors:
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 323140 important
Bug#323140: earth3d: Failure to start
Severity set to `important'.
> retitle 323140 earth3d: Fail to start because libXmu.so is missing
Bug#323140: earth3d: Failure to start
Changed Bug title.
> thanks
Stopping processing her
Your message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 01:17:10 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#321220: fixed in qjackctl 0.2.18-2
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
Your message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 01:17:08 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#315946: fixed in phpgroupware 0.9.16.005-3.sarge1
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
Your message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 01:32:09 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#323630: fixed in ace 5.4.7-3
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 now your r
Your message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 01:47:03 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#323521: fixed in gem 1:0.90.0-16
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
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> retitle 322723 D-I: 'ip route add' fails w/ "Network is unreachable"
Bug#322723: D-I: 'id route add' fails w/ "Network is unreachable"
Changed Bug title.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking
Patch included
--
__
.Ž `. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: :' !
`. `Ž gpg: B345BDD3
`- Please don't cc, I'm subscribed to the list
--- php/file/file_overview.php 2005-08-19 10:34:09.979785856 +0100
+++ php/file/file_overview.php 2005-08-19 10:35:09.305340062 +0100
@@ -114,
Package: phpgroupware-fudforum
Version: 0.9.16.006-1
Severity: grave
Tags: security
Justification: user security hole
The Fudforum in egroupware is vulnerable to CAN-2005-2600:
FUDForum 2.6.15 with "Tree View" enabled allows remote attackers
to read private posts via a modified mid parameter.
See
Package: egroupware-fudforum
Version: 1.0.0.008-2.dfsg-1
Severity: grave
Tags: security
Justification: user security hole
The Fudforum in egroupware is vulnerable to CAN-2005-2600:
FUDForum 2.6.15 with "Tree View" enabled allows remote attackers
to read private posts via a modified mid parameter.
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.4
> tags 318633 + patch
Bug#318633: Multiple security problems (CAN-2004-2162 and CAN-2004-2161)
Tags were: security
Tags added: patch
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # now that we're talking about an NMU, I might as well bump the
> # severity now
> severity 320413 serious
Bug#320413: texinfo must provide texi2pdf - causes FTBFS, e.g. of laptop-net
Severity set to `serious'.
> stop
Stopping processing here.
Please
A workaround to this problem is to start APT/dpkg with
MALLPC_CHECK_=0 in the environment:
MALLOC_CHECK_=0 dpkg --configure -a
--
.''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: :' :proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info
`. `'`
`- Debian - when you have better th
Dear Josip!
I would like to ask you if I can take over texinfo from you. I have
prepared a package for new upstream (see other emails) fixing an
important bug which stops teTeX-3.0 to enter unstable.
Best wishes
Norbert
---
On Fre, 19 Aug 2005, Frank Küster wrote:
> although one is trivial). Norbert, you should provide one, only for the
> Debian-specific parts, and ideally comparing the renamed files with the
> right original.
Ok, but I seriously revamped the stuff, using more dh_commands etc. BUt
I will send in a d
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 323897 grave
Bug#323897: base-config: unable to upgrade to 2.70 (syntax error)
Severity set to `grave'.
> close 323897 2.71
Bug#323897: base-config: unable to upgrade to 2.70 (syntax error)
'close' is deprecated; see http://www.debian.org/Bugs
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tag 318633 + fixed
Bug#318633: Multiple security problems (CAN-2004-2162 and CAN-2004-2161)
Tags were: patch security
Tags added: fixed
> quit
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrato
Package: stumpwm
Version: 0.0.4+cvs20050802-1
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello,
stumpwm requires the CLX components, which is not installed by
default, but only recommended.
While once I have installed cmucl-source, I ca
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.5
> merge 319487 319488
Bug#319487: star: file conflict with grunch
Bug#319488: grunch: File conflict with star
Merged 319487 319488.
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please c
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.5
> reassign 319487 grunch
Bug#319487: star: file conflict with grunch
Bug reassigned from package `star' to `grunch'.
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please contact me if yo
Your message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 03:55:50 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#323562: fixed in libqwt 4.2.0-3
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 now you
Your message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 04:02:03 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#262961: fixed in gnome-apt 0.4.8-1
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
Package: packagesearch
Version: 1.3
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
Hi,
here is the problem:
# apt-get install packagesearch
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done
Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
requested an impo
Your message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 04:02:06 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#323896: fixed in libtextwrap 0.1-3
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 now
Your message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 04:02:03 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#304381: fixed in gnome-apt 0.4.8-1
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 message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 04:02:03 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#254212: fixed in gnome-apt 0.4.8-1
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 message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 04:02:03 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#251635: fixed in gnome-apt 0.4.8-1
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]:
> tag 323691 + fixed
Bug#323691: gconfmm2.6: rebuild needed for C++ ABI transition (NMU patch
attached)
Tags were: patch
Tags added: fixed
> quit
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administra
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tag 323752 + fixed
Bug#323752: gnome-vfsmm2.6: rebuild needed for C++ ABI transition (NMU patch
attached)
Tags were: patch
Tags added: fixed
> quit
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system admini
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tag 323766 + fixed
Bug#323766: libgnomecanvasmm2.6: rebuild needed for C++ ABI transition (NMU
patch attached)
Tags were: patch
Tags added: fixed
> quit
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system a
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tag 323555 + fixed
Bug#323555: libglademm2.4: rebuild needed for C++ ABI transition (NMU patch
attached)
Tags were: patch
Tags added: fixed
> quit
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system adminis
On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 10:19:48PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
>Is there any progress being made on this bug? I can't install any
>more debconf-using packages on my system, or packages uses perl for
>maintainer scripts, and this is quite bad.
I haven't been able to replicate the problem.
debcon
I've got a fix for bugs #306791 and #309799 at
http://damour.info/debian/ but so far, I haven't gotten anyone to
sponsor the uploaded. Anyone who is interested, please upload the
changes. Thanks!
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Hello,
I have attached a patch that removes the ~/.siegerc generation.
Regards,
Bastian
--
,''`. Bastian Kleineidam
: :' :GnuPG Schlüssel
`. `'gpg --keyserver wwwkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 32EC6F3E
`-
--- doc/Makefile.in.upstream2005-08-19 13
Your message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 04:47:05 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#323893: fixed in syck 0.55-1
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
Package: libgmp3c2
Version: 4.1.4-10
Severity: critical
Justification: breaks unrelated software
# /etc/init.d/clamav-freshclam restart
Stopping ClamAV virus database updater: freshclam.
Starting ClamAV virus database updater: freshclam/usr/bin/freshclam:
error while loading shared libraries: libg
Package: tuxkart
Version: 0.4.0-4
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
Hi,
here is the problem:
# apt-get install tuxkart
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree... Done
Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
requested an impossible s
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.5
> tags 321816 + patch
Bug#321816: siege: FTBFS: Tries to create files outside source dir.
There were no tags set.
Tags added: patch
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please c
reassign 322746 debconf 1.4.57
severity 322746 important
thanks
also sprach Brendan O'Dea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.08.19.1333 +0200]:
> I haven't been able to replicate the problem.
Ouch.
But you are right in thinking about frontends, the bug appears with
the readline frontend, but if I select
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 322746 debconf 1.4.57
Bug#322746: glibc detected *** double free or corruption
Bug#304604: perl: heap corruption causes installation of other packages to fail
(debconf is aborting) with new glibc
Bug reassigned from package `perl' to `debconf'
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> submitter 281275 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Bug#281275: Deadlocks on PCMCIA insert
Changed Bug submitter from Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Thomas Hood
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
> submitter 281360 Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Bug#281360: pppco
Your message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 14:22:58 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line fixed in 0.4.8-1
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 responsibility to
Your message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 14:22:58 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line fixed in 0.4.8-1
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 responsibility to
Your message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 14:22:58 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line fixed in 0.4.8-1
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 responsibility to
Your message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 14:22:58 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line fixed in 0.4.8-1
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 responsibility to
Your message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 05:32:07 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#323936: fixed in stumpwm 0.0.4+cvs20050819-1
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
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 323936 fixed
Bug#323936: stumpwm: CLX component missing, please add dependency to
cmucl-source
There were no tags set.
Tags added: fixed
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system adm
Package: mutt
Version: 1.5.10-1
Severity: grave
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
This report was posted on full-disclosure. Please have a look at
http://www.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/Full-Disclosure/2005-08/0594.html
for more info.
Regards, Daniel
- -- System Information:
Debian
On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 02:54:18PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > It's the same bug. And there is no patch yet.
>
> The bug in question is that, in spite of trying to pass
> --disable-optimized to ./configure, upstream's build scripts still set
I am curious, what is the point of disabling the o
Your message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#323560: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reopen 323930
Bug#323930: f-prot-installer: Script /usr/bin/f-prot doesn't work with f-prot
4.6.0
Bug reopened, originator not changed.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administr
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 323930 sarge
Bug#323930: f-prot-installer: Script /usr/bin/f-prot doesn't work with f-prot
4.6.0
There were no tags set.
Tags added: sarge
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system a
Christian Hammers wrote:
> Hello Security Team
>
> Are you aware of this bug? The "interdiff" patch are already in the BTS.
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=319526
> Applied the upstream patch that fixes a tempfile vulnerability in the
> mysqld_install_db script th
Your message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#323560: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#323560: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#322768: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#322768: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#321796: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#321796: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#321796: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#321796: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#321712: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#321712: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#321561: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#321561: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#321561: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#323560: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#323560: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#321561: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#321561: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#322768: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#321712: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#322768: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#322768: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#321712: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#321712: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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 Fri, 19 Aug 2005 06:17:17 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#321796: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-4
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
Problem reduced to RFC2307BIS support. I dont need dn's as member and can
life
without!
>From Readme:
>This support makes
>uses of the Berkeley DB library to cache DN to login name mappings
But even with -DRFC2307BIS no libdb* is linked against nss_ldap.so!?!
(libdb3
and libdb4.2 with developervers
On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 11:56:47AM +0200, Frank K?ster wrote:
> > Also, the general principle about NMUs is to make as few changes as
> > possible to the package to fix the specific bug in question. If the
> > maintainer is happy for you to make more changes or to adopt the
> > package, fine, othe
Your message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 07:02:10 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#299166: fixed in mysql-ruby 2.6.3-1
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
Thanks for the report.
Well, #316628 was fixed. But apt seems to be changing its ABI at a daily
basis (its another version of apt that is currently missing) :-(
Currently I can't do anything about this, because QT3 is not yet
compiled with the GCC4, resulting in a crash when recompiling against
th
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 320573 important
Bug#320573: hsftp: doesn't really work
Severity set to `important'.
> tags 320573 + upstream
Bug#320573: hsftp: doesn't really work
There were no tags set.
Tags added: upstream
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please conta
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 323973 serious
Bug#323973: openexr: FTBFS in several arches because of --as-needed
Severity set to `serious'.
> merge 323973 323129
Bug#323129: openexr: ftbfs [sparc] OpenEXR requires a recent version of zlib
Bug#323973: openexr: FTBFS in seve
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 323973 serious
Bug#323973: openexr: FTBFS in several arches because of --as-needed
Bug#323129: openexr: ftbfs [sparc] OpenEXR requires a recent version of zlib
Severity set to `serious'.
> merge 323973 323129
Bug#323129: openexr: ftbfs [sparc]
This bug is relevant to many other Ruby packages, so I'm copying
debian-ruby ML.
Debian Ruby Policy states:
The package name libfoo-ruby should be used for a dummy package that
depends on libfoo-rubyX.Y that is packaged for default version of ruby
X.Y. By using such a dummy package, user ca
Your message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 08:47:06 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#323973: fixed in openexr 1.2.2-4
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 yo
Your message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 08:47:06 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#323973: fixed in openexr 1.2.2-4
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 yo
Package: gcl
Version: 2.6.6-1
Severity: serious
Justification: no longer builds from source
gcc -c -Wall -DVOL=volatile -fsigned-char -pipe -pg -O3
-I/tmp/buildd/gcl-2.6.6/o -I../h -I../gcl-tk num_sfun.c
num_sfun.c: In function 'number_exp':
num_sfun.c:67: error: invalid storage class for funct
Your message dated Fri, 19 Aug 2005 08:47:15 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#266416: fixed in wdg-html-validator 1.5.7+dfsg-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 c
1 - 100 of 197 matches
Mail list logo
