Your message dated Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:32:05 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#438511: fixed in centerim 4.22.1-2.1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is no
Am Sonntag 26 August 2007 schrieb Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña:
> file /usr/lib/snort_dynamicengine/libsf_engine.so.0.0.0
Hi Javier,
thank you for your fast response.
This is my output. Please take a look:
---
1.
protheus2:/home/ullhan63#
file /usr/lib/snort_dynamicengine/libsf_
Your message dated Sun, 26 Aug 2007 11:47:04 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#439550: fixed in libmtp 0.2.1-2
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 you
Your message dated Sun, 26 Aug 2007 13:46:43 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line python-central: errors installing python-xml (on arm)
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
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.7
> severity 439357 normal
Bug#439357: xserver-xorg: X server faild-no usable configuration
Severity set to `normal' from `grave'
> reassign 439357 xserver-xorg-core
Bug#439357: xserver-
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 439550 pending
Bug#439550: libmtp6: trying to overwrite `/etc/udev/rules.d/libmtp.rules',
which is also in package libmtp5
There were no tags set.
Tags added: pending
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Package: xdelta3
Version: 0q.dfsg-1
Severity: serious
Hi,
Your package is failing to build with the following error:
ld -shared xdelta3.o xdelta3_wrap.o -o xdelta3module.so
/usr/lib/libpython2.4.so -lc
ld: xdelta3.o: relocation R_X86_64_32S against `a local symbol' can not be used
when making a
Package: softgun
Version: 0.16-1
Severity: serious
Hi,
Your package is failing to build with the following error:
rfbserver.c:46:18: error: zlib.h: No such file or directory
rfbserver.c:137: error: expected specifier-qualifier-list before
'z_stream'
rfbserver.c: In function 'rfbsrv_disconnect':
r
Package: netmrg
Version: 0.19-1
Severity: serious
Hi,
Your package is failing to build on all 64 bit arches with the following
error:
checking whether NLS is requested... yes
checking for GNU gettext in libc... no
checking for iconv... yes
checking for GNU gettext in libintl... no
checking whethe
On Sun, Aug 26, 2007 at 11:25:07AM +0200, Hans wrote:
> Dear maintainers,
>
> on my AMD64 X2 system the latest version inhibits to start. It is looking
> like an dependency or lib related problem.
It looks like the libraries that snort needs to use are not compiled properly
in ADM64's autobuilde
On Sun, Aug 26, 2007 at 11:25:07AM +0200, Hans wrote:
> ///usr/lib/snort_dynamicengine/libsf_engine.so: wrong ELF class: ELFCLASS32
I'm not a library expert, but this bug looks like the libsf_engine.so was
built as a 32bit library, which cannot be loaded into a 64bit program. Could
you please also
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> forwarded 439264 http://bugs.kde.org/149226
Bug#439264: k3b: Hangs the System by irritating DVD-Readers (IDE-DMA/IRQ Storm)
Noted your statement that Bug has been forwarded to http://bugs.kde.org/149226.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please conta
forwarded 439264 http://bugs.kde.org/149226
thanks
Hi Tom,
I forwarded your bug report to the K3b main developer. Feel free to visit
the KDE bug tracker directly to discuss your problems directly with
Sebastian.
Thanks for taking the time to report this, it looks quite serious.
Francois
--
Your message dated Sun, 26 Aug 2007 10:54:20 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#439348: fixed
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility t
Your message dated Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:43:05 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixed in gjdoc-0.7.8-5
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 responsibil
Your message dated Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:43:05 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixed in gjdoc-0.7.8-5
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 responsibil
Your message dated Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:43:05 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixed in gjdoc-0.7.8-5
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 responsibil
Your message dated Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:43:05 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixed in gjdoc-0.7.8-5
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 responsibil
Your message dated Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:43:05 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixed in gjdoc-0.7.8-5
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 responsibil
Your message dated Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:43:05 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixed in gjdoc-0.7.8-5
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 responsibil
Your message dated Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:43:05 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Fixed in gjdoc-0.7.8-5
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 responsibil
Your message dated Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:29:40 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen t
Your message dated Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:29:40 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Removed
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen t
2007/8/25, Christoph Pfister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > Most of the dependencies were turned into "Recommends:" beginning with
> > > version 1.1.7-2. This renders the package unusable for almost
> > > (possibly that there's exception; but I can't imagine any) every user
> > > of the library; excep
tags 439469 +patch
thanks
Hi!
I just happened to run on to this bug, and had already prepared a
patch, just as mentioned in the earlier mails. I would like to confirm
that this (very small) patch, as Bryan mentions, seems to solve the
problem.
HTH.
Kumar
--
Kumar Appaiah,
458, Jamuna Hostel,
I
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 439469 +patch
Bug#439469: missing G_END_DECLS in gimpcolorprofilestore.h causes FTBFSes
There were no tags set.
Bug#439473: libgimp2.0-dev: #include fails with g++
Bug#439483: gimp-texturize: FTBFS: block.h:101: error: template with C linkage
Tags
Package: snort
Version: 2.7.0-3
Severity: grave
-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.22-1-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (c
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> unblock 439483 by 439469
Bug#439469: missing G_END_DECLS in gimpcolorprofilestore.h causes FTBFSes
Bug#439483: gimp-texturize: FTBFS: block.h:101: error: template with C linkage
Was blocked by: 439469 439473
Blocking bugs of 439483 removed: 439469, 4394
unblock 439483 by 439469
reassign 439483 libgimp2.0-dev
forcemerge 439469 439483
thanks
On Sun, Aug 26, 2007 at 02:27:44PM +0530, Kumar Appaiah wrote:
> block 439483 by 439469
> thanks
>
> This bug is caused by the breakage of libglib2.0-dev, as given in
> #439469.
A closer look and a recompilat
block 439483 by 439469
thanks
This bug is caused by the breakage of libglib2.0-dev, as given in
#439469.
Kumar
--
Kumar Appaiah,
458, Jamuna Hostel,
Indian Institute of Technology Madras,
Chennai - 600 036
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble?
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> block 439483 by 439469
Bug#439469: missing G_END_DECLS in gimpcolorprofilestore.h causes FTBFSes
Bug#439483: gimp-texturize: FTBFS: block.h:101: error: template with C linkage
Was not blocked by any bugs.
Blocking bugs of 439483 added: 439469, 439473
>
i can confirm this bug. i get freezes constantly with 100.14.11, but
none at all with 100.14.09. this is on 2.6.22-1-amd64
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
up to now my system is fully upgraded and the problem with
kstartupconfig remains. the version of the package is 4:3.5.7.dfsg.1-5.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 439515 important
Bug#439515: kdelibs4-dev: Missing Replaces on kdelibs4c2a
Severity set to `important' from `serious'
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administra
tags 439480 +patch
thanks
I have managed to get this bug fixed by supplying the right
Build-Depends for the TeXLive packages. Please see the patch attached.
HTH.
Kumar
--
Kumar Appaiah,
458, Jamuna Hostel,
Indian Institute of Technology Madras,
Chennai - 600 036
diff -urN doc-debian-uk-0.0.2006
Your message dated Sun, 26 Aug 2007 09:33:41 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line FTBFS (Catalan patches applied in wrong order)
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
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 439480 +patch
Bug#439480: doc-debian-uk: FTBFS: debiandoc2latexps: one or more used LaTeX
typesetting styles not found
There were no tags set.
Tags added: patch
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian
101 - 137 of 137 matches
Mail list logo
