postman_2.1-5_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
postman_2.1-5.dsc
postman_2.1-5.diff.gz
postman_2.1-5_i386.deb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
Accepted:
postman_2.1-5.diff.gz
to pool/main/p/postman/postman_2.1-5.diff.gz
postman_2.1-5.dsc
to pool/main/p/postman/postman_2.1-5.dsc
postman_2.1-5_i386.deb
to pool/main/p/postman/postman_2.1-5_i386.deb
Override entries for your package:
postman_2.1-5.dsc - source web
Accepted:
emifreq-applet_0.18-4.diff.gz
to pool/main/e/emifreq-applet/emifreq-applet_0.18-4.diff.gz
emifreq-applet_0.18-4.dsc
to pool/main/e/emifreq-applet/emifreq-applet_0.18-4.dsc
emifreq-applet_0.18-4_i386.deb
to pool/main/e/emifreq-applet/emifreq-applet_0.18-4_i386.deb
Override
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
# Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.13
severity 462280 important
Bug#462280: newbiedoc: should this package be removed?
Severity set to `important' from `serious'
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please contact
sn_0.3.8-7_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
sn_0.3.8-7.dsc
sn_0.3.8-7.diff.gz
sn_0.3.8-7_i386.deb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
kxgenerator_0.3.7+dfsg-2_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
kxgenerator_0.3.7+dfsg-2.dsc
kxgenerator_0.3.7+dfsg-2.diff.gz
kxgenerator_0.3.7+dfsg-2_i386.deb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a
Accepted:
sn_0.3.8-7.diff.gz
to pool/main/s/sn/sn_0.3.8-7.diff.gz
sn_0.3.8-7.dsc
to pool/main/s/sn/sn_0.3.8-7.dsc
sn_0.3.8-7_i386.deb
to pool/main/s/sn/sn_0.3.8-7_i386.deb
Override entries for your package:
sn_0.3.8-7.dsc - source news
sn_0.3.8-7_i386.deb - optional news
Announcing to
Accepted:
kxgenerator_0.3.7+dfsg-2.diff.gz
to pool/main/k/kxgenerator/kxgenerator_0.3.7+dfsg-2.diff.gz
kxgenerator_0.3.7+dfsg-2.dsc
to pool/main/k/kxgenerator/kxgenerator_0.3.7+dfsg-2.dsc
kxgenerator_0.3.7+dfsg-2_i386.deb
to pool/main/k/kxgenerator/kxgenerator_0.3.7+dfsg-2_i386.deb
gtkpbbuttons_0.6.9-2_powerpc.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
gtkpbbuttons_0.6.9-2.dsc
gtkpbbuttons_0.6.9-2.diff.gz
gtkpbbuttons-common_0.6.9-2_all.deb
gtkpbbuttons_0.6.9-2_powerpc.deb
gtkpbbuttons-gnome_0.6.9-2_powerpc.deb
Greetings,
Your Debian
powerprefs_0.5.1-2_powerpc.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
powerprefs_0.5.1-2.dsc
powerprefs_0.5.1-2.diff.gz
powerprefs_0.5.1-2_powerpc.deb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
Accepted:
powerprefs_0.5.1-2.diff.gz
to pool/main/p/powerprefs/powerprefs_0.5.1-2.diff.gz
powerprefs_0.5.1-2.dsc
to pool/main/p/powerprefs/powerprefs_0.5.1-2.dsc
powerprefs_0.5.1-2_powerpc.deb
to pool/main/p/powerprefs/powerprefs_0.5.1-2_powerpc.deb
Override entries for your package:
Accepted:
gtkpbbuttons-common_0.6.9-2_all.deb
to pool/main/g/gtkpbbuttons/gtkpbbuttons-common_0.6.9-2_all.deb
gtkpbbuttons-gnome_0.6.9-2_powerpc.deb
to pool/main/g/gtkpbbuttons/gtkpbbuttons-gnome_0.6.9-2_powerpc.deb
gtkpbbuttons_0.6.9-2.diff.gz
to
opensched_0.4.4-6_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
opensched_0.4.4-6.dsc
opensched_0.4.4-6.diff.gz
opensched_0.4.4-6_i386.deb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe.
Accepted:
opensched_0.4.4-6.diff.gz
to pool/main/o/opensched/opensched_0.4.4-6.diff.gz
opensched_0.4.4-6.dsc
to pool/main/o/opensched/opensched_0.4.4-6.dsc
opensched_0.4.4-6_i386.deb
to pool/main/o/opensched/opensched_0.4.4-6_i386.deb
Override entries for your package:
Your message dated Sat, 26 Jan 2008 16:17:03 +
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#417463: fixed in opensched 0.4.4-6
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
libapache2-mod-xmlrpc2_2.2.1-3_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
libapache2-mod-xmlrpc2_2.2.1-3.dsc
libapache2-mod-xmlrpc2_2.2.1-3.diff.gz
libapache2-mod-xmlrpc2_2.2.1-3_i386.deb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Accepted:
libapache2-mod-xmlrpc2_2.2.1-3.diff.gz
to
pool/main/liba/libapache2-mod-xmlrpc2/libapache2-mod-xmlrpc2_2.2.1-3.diff.gz
libapache2-mod-xmlrpc2_2.2.1-3.dsc
to pool/main/liba/libapache2-mod-xmlrpc2/libapache2-mod-xmlrpc2_2.2.1-3.dsc
libapache2-mod-xmlrpc2_2.2.1-3_i386.deb
to
There are disparities between your recently accepted upload and the
override file for the following file(s):
libapache2-mod-xmlrpc2_2.2.1-3_i386.deb: package says section is web, override
says net.
Either the package or the override file is incorrect. If you think
the override is correct and
Package: htdig
Severity: wishlist
Tags: l10n patch
Please include attached translation fi.po to the package.
Regards,
Esko Arajärvi
msgid
msgstr
Project-Id-Version: htdig\n
Report-Msgid-Bugs-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
POT-Creation-Date: 2008-01-20 14:11+0100\n
PO-Revision-Date: 2008-01-26
FYI: The status of the cynthiune.app source package
in Debian's testing distribution has changed.
Previous version: (not in testing)
Current version: 0.9.5-7
--
This email is automatically generated; [EMAIL PROTECTED] is responsible.
See http://people.debian.org/~henning/trille/ for more
Hi,
The (orphaned) tDOM package in debian is pretty old, so I've built an
updated version for my own use and that of others in the OpenACS
(http://openacs.org/) community. What's the process for getting this
accepted into the debian archives?
cheers
Russell Muetzelfeldt [EMAIL
libgtk-perl_0.7009-14_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
libgtk-perl_0.7009-14.dsc
libgtk-perl_0.7009-14.diff.gz
libgtk-perl_0.7009-14_i386.deb
libgtk-imlib-perl_0.7009-14_i386.deb
libgdk-pixbuf-perl_0.7009-14_i386.deb
libgnome-perl_0.7009-14_i386.deb
Accepted:
libgdk-pixbuf-perl_0.7009-14_i386.deb
to pool/main/libg/libgtk-perl/libgdk-pixbuf-perl_0.7009-14_i386.deb
libgladexml-perl_0.7009-14_i386.deb
to pool/main/libg/libgtk-perl/libgladexml-perl_0.7009-14_i386.deb
libgnome-perl_0.7009-14_i386.deb
to
On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 10:47:50PM +0100, Vincent Bernat wrote:
Hi !
python-simpleparse has two annoying bugs:
http://bugs.debian.org/426429
http://bugs.debian.org/357537
Both of them is solved by a new upstream version. The last upload by the
maintainer is from 2005?[1]. This is
On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 08:05:01PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
Moreover, and that's the main point of this report, it seems that the
last time the clash happened was January 2006, no other clashes in 2007
nor 2008. Is it possible that the issue has been solved elsewhere and
the clash no
Package: qa.debian.org
Severity: wishlist
Please don't show the Uploaders field when it is empty.
Examples:
http://packages.qa.debian.org/n/nvidia-graphics-drivers.html
http://packages.qa.debian.org/n/nsis.html
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
signature.asc
Description: This is
OoO En cette fin de nuit blanche du samedi 26 janvier 2008, vers 05:23,
Seo Sanghyeon [EMAIL PROTECTED] disait:
Therefore, I'd like to request to orphan this package. I would then
adopt it and maintain it inside Debian Python Modules Team.
You are right. I am sorry.
Consider
user [EMAIL PROTECTED]
usertag 462627 + pts
thanks
On Sat, Jan 26, 2008 at 06:46:32PM +0900, Paul Wise wrote:
Please don't show the Uploaders field when it is empty.
I think in the beginning this was intentional (see the markup for the
None string to convince yourself of this :-) ).
However
On Sat, 26 Jan 2008, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 08:05:01PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
Moreover, and that's the main point of this report, it seems that the
last time the clash happened was January 2006, no other clashes in 2007
nor 2008. Is it possible that the
On Sat, Jan 26, 2008 at 02:17:19PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
Note that this behaviour should be fixed. It happens that dak send several
Accepted mails during the same second for example when the package gets
out of NEW and when several upload happened while the package was sitting
in NEW.
On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 09:57:12PM -0500, Barry deFreese wrote:
I think I finally got it right. At least it display OK for me and
lintian is happy now. I've put a new one on mentors.
Uploaded
Gruesse,
--
Frank Lichtenheld [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www: http://www.djpig.de/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 09:37:17PM -0500, Barry deFreese wrote:
New one one mentors.
Uploaded
Gruesse,
--
Frank Lichtenheld [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www: http://www.djpig.de/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 09:01:22PM -0500, Barry deFreese wrote:
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libapache2-mod-xmlrpc2/libapache2-mod-xmlrpc2_2.2.1-3.dsc
Fairly intrusive but makes it build and fixes 2 important bugs.
debdiff between the old and new binary:
File lists identical
On 26/01/2008, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 09:01:22PM -0500, Barry deFreese wrote:
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/libapache2-mod-xmlrpc2/libapache2-mod-xmlrpc2_2.2.1-3.dsc
Fairly intrusive but makes it build and fixes 2 important bugs.
debdiff between the
Your message dated Sat, 26 Jan 2008 17:05:23 +0100
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line qa.debian.org: Accurately represent Bugs/Patches available in
the Todo
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
On Tue, 25 Dec 2007 13:13:56 +0100, Frank S. Thomas wrote:
If one bug is assigned to two or more binary packages of the same
source package, the PTS' Bugs count summary counts this bug more
than once. This summary should only count bugs in the source package.
The DDPO does this right, compare
Your message dated Sat, 26 Jan 2008 17:34:26 +0100
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line PTS: lingering new upstream version todo
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 Sat, 26 Jan 2008 17:40:10 +0100
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line invalid, would induce a different meaning of summary than bts
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
Your message dated Sat, 26 Jan 2008 17:46:36 +0100
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line should not complain about ITPs of packages which are only in
experimental
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
On Sat, 26 Jan 2008, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Tue, 25 Dec 2007 13:13:56 +0100, Frank S. Thomas wrote:
If one bug is assigned to two or more binary packages of the same
source package, the PTS' Bugs count summary counts this bug more
than once. This summary should only count bugs in the
On Sat, 26 Jan 2008, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Sat, Jan 26, 2008 at 02:17:19PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
Note that this behaviour should be fixed. It happens that dak send several
Accepted mails during the same second for example when the package gets
out of NEW and when several
41 matches
Mail list logo