close 750411
thanks
This bug was filed for debian arm64 ports unreleased archive. Either
versioning or targeting rule is different from official debian distro
standard. It is inproper to report the bug here and made some confusion.
Sorry if it has made noisy.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
close 750417
thanks
This bug was filed for debian arm64 ports unreleased archive. Either
versioning or targeting rule is different from official debian distro
standard. It is inproper to report the bug here and made some confusion.
Sorry if it has made noisy.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
close 750435
thanks
This bug was filed for debian arm64 ports unreleased archive. Either
versioning or targeting rule is different from official debian distro
standard. It is inproper to report the bug here and made some confusion.
Sorry if it has made noisy.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
close 750434
thanks
This bug was filed for debian arm64 ports unreleased archive. Either
versioning or targeting rule is different from official debian distro
standard. It is inproper to report the bug here and made some confusion.
Sorry if it has made noisy.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
close 750420
thanks
This bug was filed for debian arm64 ports unreleased archive. Either
versioning or targeting rule is different from official debian distro
standard. It is inproper to report the bug here and made some confusion.
Sorry if it has made noisy.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
close 750419
thanks
This bug was filed for debian arm64 ports unreleased archive. Either
versioning or targeting rule is different from official debian distro
standard. It is inproper to report the bug here and made some confusion.
Sorry if it has made noisy.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
close 750433
thanks
This bug was filed for debian arm64 ports unreleased archive. Either
versioning or targeting rule is different from official debian distro
standard. It is inproper to report the bug here and made some confusion.
Sorry if it has made noisy.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
close 750438
thanks
This bug was filed for debian arm64 ports unreleased archive. Either
versioning or targeting rule is different from official debian distro
standard. It is inproper to report the bug here and made some confusion.
Sorry if it has made noisy.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
close 750437
thanks
This bug was filed for debian arm64 ports unreleased archive. Either
versioning or targeting rule is different from official debian distro
standard. It is inproper to report the bug here and made some confusion.
Sorry if it has made noisy.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
close 750414
thanks
This bug was filed for debian arm64 ports unreleased archive. Either
versioning or targeting rule is different from official debian distro
standard. It is inproper to report the bug here and made some confusion.
Sorry if it has made noisy.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
close 750439
thanks
This bug was filed for debian arm64 ports unreleased archive. Either
versioning or targeting rule is different from official debian distro
standard. It is inproper to report the bug here and made some confusion.
Sorry if it has made noisy.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Hi Eriberto,
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 01:51:57PM -0300, Eriberto wrote:
and for the package you can clone the current debtag package from
anonscm, I will commit these changes once decided the proper way to
solve the:
Not found.
http://anonscm.debian.org/git/debtags/debtags.git/
3.
On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 11:30:09PM +0200, Guido van Steen wrote:
well, the command rmdir only removes a dir when it is empty.
The command rmdir wasn't mentioned in this thread. The OP said remove the
empty directory /etc/apt.conf.d that shouldn't exits.
Yes, I mean postinst, sorry for the
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package gcc-doc-defaults
* Package name: gcc-doc-defaults
Version : 5:10
* License : GNU-meta-license
Section : doc
The main change is adding gccgo-doc,
14 matches
Mail list logo