On 31.07.2012 08:29, Andreas Tille wrote:
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 08:18:13AM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On 31.07.2012 07:35, Andreas Tille wrote:
>The problem I'm now wondering is the excuses page for beast-mcmc:
>
> http://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=beast-mcmc
>
>I have no idea why i
Hi Adam.
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 08:18:13AM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On 31.07.2012 07:35, Andreas Tille wrote:
> >The problem I'm now wondering is the excuses page for beast-mcmc:
> >
> > http://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=beast-mcmc
> >
> >I have no idea why it is mentioning
> >
> >
On 31.07.2012 07:35, Andreas Tille wrote:
The problem I'm now wondering is the excuses page for beast-mcmc:
http://qa.debian.org/excuses.php?package=beast-mcmc
I have no idea why it is mentioning
beast-doc, beast-examples
for certain architectures even if these packages are arch=all and
Hi,
according to debian-release[1] some binary packages (beast-mcmc-lib)
where created when the package was in the new queue even if this should
not have happened due to the fact that it needs a package from unstable
to build. In bug #681957 I have asked ftpmaster to delete beast-mcmc-lib
on thes
4 matches
Mail list logo