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

Re: Release-critical Bugreport for February 22, 1999

On Mon, Feb 22, 1999 at 04:51:39PM +0100, Wichert Akkerman wrote:

> > > Package: moonlight (main)
> > > Maintainer: Marcelo Magallon <mmagallo@debian.org>
> > >   33548  moonlight on m68k depends on the old mesa
> >
> > Simply recompile the regular version so the m68k team will rebuild it
> > as well?
> Think so.

Pardon me?

Do you want me to recompile it because it isn't compiled on m68k? I have
0.5.3-2 here.  m68k has 0.5.3-1... if ANYONE had bothered to submit a bug
report because the package couldn't be built from sources, I would have been
happy to take the time to fix the problem, but without a bug report I can't
do nothing about it.  And I would have really appreciated it if the report
was submitted earlier, not one week before release.  Now I just need someone
to tell me wtf is wrong.

Enough with ranting.

> > > Maintainer: Nicolás Lichtmaier <nick@feedback.net.ar>
> > >   33624  [const@CE.CCTPU.EDU.RU: wget-1.5.3, chmod+symlinks]
> >
> > Since Nick has *a lot* of open and old bugs I assume that he isn't
> > around.  I have placed a fixed package in ~joey on master as well as
> > in ftp://ftp.infodrom.north.de/pub/people/joey/debian/non-maintainer/
> > If I don't receive objections I'll move it into Incoming tonight.
> Go for it (I was planning to do this tonight)

Ask Nicolas, he IS arround.

> > > Package: wu-ftpd-academ (main)
> > > Maintainer: Heiko Schlittermann <heiko@lotte.sax.de>
> > >   33634  wu-ftpd keeps disabling itself [FIX]
> >
> > I've uploaded a fixed version now.  I compared the prerm with the
> > one from the potato version and didn't find a distinction between
> > "prerm upgrade" and "prerm remove" so I guess the error is still
> > existant in the potato version.

I just wrestled with this one...

	$ update-alternatives --auto ftpd

and it fixed itself.  I didn't even had to reinstall/configure
wu-ftpd-academ.  And this was the recent _hamm_ version.  VERY annoying.


Reply to: