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

Uploaded dhcp 2.0pl5-9 (sparc) to ftp-master



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2002 22:02:59 -0500
Source: dhcp
Binary: dhcp-client-udeb dhcp dhcp-relay dhcp-client
Architecture: sparc
Version: 2.0pl5-9
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian/sparc Build Daemon <buildd@sparc.debian.org>
Changed-By: Eloy A. Paris <peloy@debian.org>
Description: 
 dhcp       - DHCP server for automatic IP address assignment
 dhcp-client - DHCP Client
 dhcp-client-udeb - DHCP Client for debian-installer (udeb)
 dhcp-relay - DHCP Relay
Closes: 59449 88132
Changes: 
 dhcp (2.0pl5-9) unstable; urgency=low
 .
   * Make sure we don't call update-inetd if netbase is not installed.
     Thanks to Ryan Murray for the advice and for patiently fielding
     my stupid questions. This time, this really closes #59449.
     Closes: #59449 postinst uses update-inetd, which might not be available.
   * Restructured build system that provides DBS-like separation of
     patches
   * Removed all HTML tags from README, and formatted everything as
     plain old text. This file obviously should have been a pure text file
     but some upstream screw up shipped the 2.0pl5 release with the
     file as HTML. No more incorrect HTML here.
     Closes: #88132: Partial cleanup of HTML in README.html.
Files: 
 f2c05ea88ac72ba36e05542a556ae97d 211882 net optional dhcp_2.0pl5-9_sparc.deb
 42636928a915ebc942f7388fd1cf588d 199486 net optional dhcp-client_2.0pl5-9_sparc.deb
 ec15458546324b10cb3e89672be5cb94 152294 net optional dhcp-relay_2.0pl5-9_sparc.deb
 ee57cad9b2bd28ec376add51e37d3be1 48288 debian-installer optional dhcp-client-udeb_2.0pl5-9_sparc.udeb
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.6 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iEYEARECAAYFAjxpPisACgkQgD/uEicUG7COTwCg3x1owFJribHHDUGjSkjaw0b6
jpQAn0wQwaIA7OwZpteP1ntuAL5gK3XL
=hTkw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Reply to: