Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender
This message was created automatically by mail delivery software.
A message that you sent could not be delivered to all of its recipients. The
following address(es) failed:
generated | procmail -d flight:
Child process of address_pipe transport (running command "procmail -d flight") was terminated by signal 11
------ This is a copy of the message, including all the headers. ------
Received: from localhost [127.0.0.1] (flight)
by freefly.hoffleit.org with esmtp (Exim 2.02 #1 (Debian))
id 0zOehc-0001PH-02; Thu, 1 Oct 1998 11:07:12 +0200
Received: from router
by fetchmail-4.6.0 POP3
for <flight/localhost> (single-drop); Thu, 01 Oct 1998 11:07:12 CEST
Received: from localhost (fenchurch.mathi.uni-heidelberg.de) [127.0.0.1] (root)
by router.hoffleit.org with esmtp (Exim 2.02 #1 (Debian))
id 0zNjxu-0003Rq-01; Mon, 28 Sep 1998 22:32:14 +0200
Received: from murphy.debian.org by mathi.uni-heidelberg.DE (NX5.67e/NX3.0Mathi)
id AA21948; Mon, 28 Sep 98 17:51:49 +0200
Received: (qmail 7196 invoked by uid 38); 28 Sep 1998 15:51:36 -0000
Resent-Date: 28 Sep 1998 15:51:36 -0000
Resent-Cc: recipient list not shown:;@lists.debian.org
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1998 17:30:58 +0200
From: Federico Di Gregorio <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: Michael Stone <email@example.com>
Cc: Debian Developers List <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: "super" pkgs (was Re: Back to RedHat)
References: <19980924204706.A2068@home.com> <Pine.LNX.3.96.980925115520.622Hemail@example.com> <19980925201341.A3956@home.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <19980928093159.A6619@pcamb6.irfmn.mnegri.it> <19980928113543.A6926@itri.loyola.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93.2i
In-Reply-To: <19980928113543.A6926@itri.loyola.edu>; from Michael Stone on Mon, Sep 28, 1998 at 11:35:43AM -0400
X-Mailing-List: <email@example.com> archive/latest/15005
On Mon, Sep 28, 1998 at 11:35:43AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> Quoting Federico Di Gregorio (firstname.lastname@example.org):
> > IMHO "super" packages are a very good *local* solution (I use
> > them too) but for the Offcial Dist I would like to see implemented
> > something that doesn't require an empty .deb file.
Because I don't like very much fast-and-ugly hacks. If the .deb is
required for some reason it is wellcome, if it is only there because
dpkg requires a valid .deb let's patch dpkg and remove it.
> > Maybe a flag in the Package entry ("Super: yes" ?) that tells dpkg and
> > apt to NOT search for the .deb?
> So it can't be used without a major upgrade...
Why? Super packages can depend opn the right version of dpkg/apt.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org