On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 05:16:46PM +0200, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote:
On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 02:20:53PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 22:23:04 +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
IMO we should ignore this for Squeeze and proceed with removing opie after
the Squeeze
On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 02:20:53PM +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 22:23:04 +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
IMO we should ignore this for Squeeze and proceed with removing opie after
the Squeeze release.
Sounds like a good plan.
Here we are and I suggest we
tag 511582 squeeze-ignore
kthxbye
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 22:23:04 +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
IMO we should ignore this for Squeeze and proceed with removing opie after
the Squeeze release.
Sounds like a good plan.
Cheers,
Julien
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
tag 511582 squeeze-ignore
Bug #511582 [opie] packaged opie 2.4, fixing testsuite failures on arm/armel
Added tag(s) squeeze-ignore.
kthxbye
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
511582:
On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 11:39:21AM +0100, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
Le Thursday 4 November 2010 23:40:39 Moritz Muehlenhoff, vous avez écrit :
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 06:56:04PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 00:51:43 -0500, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
In
On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 11:39:21AM +0100, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
Le Thursday 4 November 2010 23:40:39 Moritz Muehlenhoff, vous avez écrit :
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 06:56:04PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 00:51:43 -0500, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
In
Le Thursday 4 November 2010 23:40:39 Moritz Muehlenhoff, vous avez écrit :
On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 06:56:04PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 00:51:43 -0500, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
In particular, i'm concerned that this package has a setuid binary, has
had only
7 matches
Mail list logo