[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#689026: marked as done (nmu: libav_6:0.8.99-1537-gacb2c79-2 (experimental))



Your message dated Fri, 28 Sep 2012 17:16:36 +0200
with message-id <20120928151636.GA25760@spike.0x539.de>
and subject line Re: Bug#689026: nmu: libav_6:0.8.99-1537-gacb2c79-2 (experimental)
has caused the Debian Bug report #689026,
regarding nmu: libav_6:0.8.99-1537-gacb2c79-2 (experimental)
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 responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
689026: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=689026
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu

libav in experimental in uninstallable on almost all architectures. because libdio libraries have changed SONAMEs since it was built there. Reinhard Tartler asked me to request binNMUs to fix this problem.

nmu libav_6:0.8.99-1537-gacb2c79-2 . ALL -armel -mipsel . -d experimental -m 'Rebuild against libcdio (>= 0.83).'

--
Jakub Wilk

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 02:41:38PM +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> libav in experimental in uninstallable on almost all architectures.
> because libdio libraries have changed SONAMEs since it was built
> there. Reinhard Tartler asked me to request binNMUs to fix this
> problem.
> 
> nmu libav_6:0.8.99-1537-gacb2c79-2 . ALL -armel -mipsel . -d experimental -m 'Rebuild against libcdio (>= 0.83).'

Done, thanks.

Kind regards
Philipp Kern 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


--- End Message ---

Reply to: