Bug#76659: marked as done (d-gtk-gnome list not on list subscription page)
Your message dated Sat, 18 Nov 2000 21:39:48 +0100
with message-id <20001118213948.A17206@cibalia.gkvk.hr>
and subject line problem with debian-gtk-gnome entry in lists.cfg
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 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 I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Darren Benham
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 9 Nov 2000 21:34:45 +0000
>From xtifr@dsp.net Thu Nov 09 15:34:44 2000
Return-path: <xtifr@dsp.net>
Received: from ns1.nothingbutnet.net [::ffff:206.13.41.251]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 13tzLI-0002m1-00; Thu, 09 Nov 2000 15:34:44 -0600
Received: from starless.xtnet (mail@[199.4.121.112])
by ns1.nothingbutnet.net (8.10.1/8.10.1/jjb-ns1) with ESMTP id eA9LYeG14833
for <submit@bugs.debian.org>; Thu, 9 Nov 2000 13:34:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Envelope-From: xtifr@dsp.net
X-Envelope-To: <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Received: from xtifr by starless.xtnet with local (Exim 3.16 #1 (Debian))
id 13tzK1-00072d-00; Thu, 09 Nov 2000 13:33:25 -0800
From: Chris Waters <xtifr@dsp.net>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: d-gtk-gnome list not on list subscription page
X-Reportbug-Version: 1.3
X-Mailer: reportbug 1.3
Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2000 13:33:25 -0800
Message-Id: <[🔎] E13tzK1-00072d-00@starless.xtnet>
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Package: www.debian.org
Version: N/A; reported 2000-11-09
Severity: normal
The debian-gtk-gnome list does not appear on the Mailing List
Subscription page, although it is listed on the Archives page.
-- System Information
Debian Release: woody
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux starless 2.2.17 #1 Sat Nov 4 18:59:30 PST 2000 i686
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 76659-done) by bugs.debian.org; 18 Nov 2000 20:40:06 +0000
>From joy@cibalia.gkvk.hr Sat Nov 18 14:40:05 2000
Return-path: <joy@cibalia.gkvk.hr>
Received: from cibalia.gkvk.hr [161.53.211.3] (mail)
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 13xEmJ-0000wE-00; Sat, 18 Nov 2000 14:40:04 -0600
Received: from joy by cibalia.gkvk.hr with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
id 13xEm4-0004Yo-00; Sat, 18 Nov 2000 21:39:48 +0100
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 21:39:48 +0100
From: Josip Rodin <joy@cibalia.gkvk.hr>
To: Martin Schulze <joey@infodrom.north.de>
Cc: listmaster@lists.debian.org, 76659-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: problem with debian-gtk-gnome entry in lists.cfg
Message-ID: <20001118213948.A17206@cibalia.gkvk.hr>
References: <[🔎] 20001117204351.A12930@cibalia.gkvk.hr> <[🔎] 20001118211506.B24088@finlandia.infodrom.north.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
User-Agent: Mutt/1.0.1i
In-Reply-To: <[🔎] 20001118211506.B24088@finlandia.infodrom.north.de>; from joey@finlandia.infodrom.north.de on Sat, Nov 18, 2000 at 09:15:07PM +0100
Delivered-To: 76659-done@bugs.debian.org
On Sat, Nov 18, 2000 at 09:15:07PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > In the lists.cfg file, the line
> >
> > List: debian-gtk-gnome@lists.debian.org
> >
> > and several other lines following that one, don't end after the last letter,
> > they have loads of spaces after it. Please remove these spaces, mklist
> > doesn't work because of this.
>
> ??? Can you translate that?
<Joy> Joey: each line has tens of empty spaces after the text
<Joey> Ahh, now I understand.
> That list used more spaces than other lists in the description
> multiline field. I reduced that to one space. Was that what
> you wanted?
That too! Thanks for all these fixes.
The -gtk-gnome list now appears correctly at www.d.o/MailingLists/subscribe
pages, thanks for reporting, the bug is closed.
--
Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
Reply to: