Accepted sl-modem 2.9.9d+e-pre2-10 (source amd64)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Tue, 01 May 2007 12:00:06 +0200
Source: sl-modem
Binary: sl-modem-daemon sl-modem-source
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 2.9.9d+e-pre2-10
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Eduard Bloch <blade@debian.org>
Changed-By: Eduard Bloch <blade@debian.org>
Description:
sl-modem-daemon - SmartLink software modem daemon
Closes: 411395 412120 415569 418919 420796
Changes:
sl-modem (2.9.9d+e-pre2-10) unstable; urgency=low
.
* Merge with 2.9.9d+e-pre2-7etch2 (closes: #411395, #412120)
* explicite Build-Dep on gcc-4.1-multilib [amd64]
* Installing slmodemd(8) manpage into sl-modem-daemon and conflicting with
previous versions of sl-modem-source (closes: #420796)
* removing sl-modem-daemon.rules after a checksum check. They are not used
anymore by the Debian package's source after sysfs/udev features have been
disabled. Send thanks to GPL symbol "protection" lovers (closes: #418919)
* slmodemd privilege dropping patch (Ian Jackson, Ubuntu, closes: #415569),
also added adduser to dependencies
* suppressing modprobe messages caused by expected failures while probing
driver availability and a better info message on amd64.
Files:
4e757b7ff732a3c15d35d153ab114f76 755 non-free/misc optional sl-modem_2.9.9d+e-pre2-10.dsc
6d28fab63c6f61d7cf4ce9d8afe1d72d 26945 non-free/misc optional sl-modem_2.9.9d+e-pre2-10.diff.gz
115e808845709c6f21cb80d7f7c9b91b 510966 non-free/misc optional sl-modem-daemon_2.9.9d+e-pre2-10_amd64.deb
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFGNxDX4QZIHu3wCMURAiX+AJ0R2lnUDq5G2cbaWEmbc0gAiteFgwCfS/m1
zma1ko5DBZ+I6vF+XdRcxhk=
=Sjoz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Accepted:
sl-modem-daemon_2.9.9d+e-pre2-10_amd64.deb
to pool/non-free/s/sl-modem/sl-modem-daemon_2.9.9d+e-pre2-10_amd64.deb
sl-modem_2.9.9d+e-pre2-10.diff.gz
to pool/non-free/s/sl-modem/sl-modem_2.9.9d+e-pre2-10.diff.gz
sl-modem_2.9.9d+e-pre2-10.dsc
to pool/non-free/s/sl-modem/sl-modem_2.9.9d+e-pre2-10.dsc
Reply to: