Re: Processed: round and round we go

2002-11-04 Thread Anthony Towns
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 12:46:00AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: [Anthony, are you subscribed to debian-x? I thought for sure you weren't.] I'm not, but it looks like mutt's group reply isn't clever enough to add me to the Mail-Followup-To field without debian-x being explicitly listed as a

Re: Processed: round and round we go

2002-11-03 Thread Branden Robinson
[Anthony, are you subscribed to debian-x? I thought for sure you weren't.] On Sun, Nov 03, 2002 at 09:10:13AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: I'd marked that bug as applying to the version in testing way back before woody was released. So either no or it was already special cased. Oh ah. Is that

Re: Processed: round and round we go

2002-11-03 Thread Anthony Towns
On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 12:46:00AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: [Anthony, are you subscribed to debian-x? I thought for sure you weren't.] I'm not, but it looks like mutt's group reply isn't clever enough to add me to the Mail-Followup-To field without debian-x being explicitly listed as a

Re: Processed: round and round we go

2002-11-03 Thread Branden Robinson
[Anthony, are you subscribed to debian-x? I thought for sure you weren't.] On Sun, Nov 03, 2002 at 09:10:13AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: I'd marked that bug as applying to the version in testing way back before woody was released. So either no or it was already special cased. Oh ah. Is that

Processed: round and round we go

2002-11-02 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: severity 143825 serious Bug#143825: xutils: why is rstart.real a conffile? Severity set to `serious'. End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian

Re: Processed: round and round we go

2002-11-02 Thread Anthony Towns
On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 02:53:41PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 12:33:12PM -0600, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: severity 143825 serious Bug#143825: xutils: why is rstart.real a conffile? Severity set to `serious'.

Re: Processed: round and round we go

2002-11-02 Thread Branden Robinson
On Sun, Nov 03, 2002 at 07:14:30AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: Huh? When update_excuses says, eg: + libcrypt-ssleay-perl (alpha, arm, hppa, i386, ia64, m68k, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc) is (less) buggy! (1 = 1) it's doesn't block the package from being

Re: Processed: round and round we go

2002-11-02 Thread Anthony Towns
On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 04:24:46PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: Yes, someone else pointed this out to me. So you didn't have to special case it, and wouldn't have needed to even if I hadn't downgraded the bug? I'd marked that bug as applying to the version in testing way back before woody

Re: Processed: round and round we go

2002-11-02 Thread Branden Robinson
On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 12:33:12PM -0600, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: severity 143825 serious Bug#143825: xutils: why is rstart.real a conffile? Severity set to `serious'. Is it your intention not to let XFree86 4.2.1-3 propagate into

Re: Processed: round and round we go

2002-11-02 Thread Anthony Towns
On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 02:53:41PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 12:33:12PM -0600, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: severity 143825 serious Bug#143825: xutils: why is rstart.real a conffile? Severity set to `serious'.

Re: Processed: round and round we go

2002-11-02 Thread Branden Robinson
On Sun, Nov 03, 2002 at 07:14:30AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: Huh? When update_excuses says, eg: + libcrypt-ssleay-perl (alpha, arm, hppa, i386, ia64, m68k, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc) is (less) buggy! (1 = 1) it's doesn't block the package from being