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

Uploaded procps 1.9.0-2 (source i386) to smaster



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Format: 1.5
Date: Tue,  9 Feb 1999 15:10:58 +1100
Source: procps
Binary: libproc-dev procps procps-nonfree xproc
Architecture: source i386
Version: 1:1.9.0-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Craig Small <csmall@debian.org>
Description: 
 libproc-dev - library for accessing process information from /proc
 procps     - The /proc file system utilities.
 procps-nonfree - The /proc file system utilities (non-free).
 xproc      - some tools to display process information on X
Changes: 
 procps (1:1.9.0-2) unstable; urgency=low
 .
   * top now resumes (Bug #32106 )
   * debhelper text problem fixed in postinst (Bug #32963 #33122 #33003 33117 )
   * oldps and ps now use alternatives (Bug #33083 )
   * ps s format now not ugly (Bug #28266 )
   * watch command line help and man page correct (Bug #31702 )
   * sessreg removed from package (Bug #32294 )
   * ps doesn't display extra spaces (Bug #27799 )
   * top has spaces in command lines again (Bug #33060 )
   * ps now has personality (Bug #22923 #18429 )
   * moved non-free skill and snice to non-free package.
Files: 
 d34e87c133ed84972e4032a084467807 653 base required procps_1.9.0-2.dsc
 1a82686954684a749c01bea625e6a338 9198 base required procps_1.9.0-2.diff.gz
 adff328b55c6bfedd5f36d51caefed6e 112386 base required procps_1.9.0-2_i386.deb
 a15e26baa3fa3ab4712460a661e8c5ce 38120 devel optional libproc-dev_1.9.0-2_i386.deb
 982722c9feb5909c9532cb3fb6f60261 20094 admin optional xproc_1.9.0-2_i386.deb
 958602aaa1ccd0295c916e7fc1cfa9f7 22736 non-free/admin extra procps-nonfree_1.9.0-2_i386.deb

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBNsECPktPWVTnxNRpAQEu6gQAi55aBMaQLwL0wdl7ulxUNO+yDmBtvv4e
I7/35v6BVqUVIOScMLpZcPE/ztWQC6qATnXcoXZfVjErYmMSV3cyQrKDg+wKYur0
UfAWEeyk2A68nyFimOQr2i9XMT8QP6vA1GBBFCVsp+g1JEq8WD8Urv29RVtC9S5j
e7eM6uHupOc=
=eeni
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Reply to: