Re: ncbi-tools6 vs. testing

To: Aaron Ucko <ucko@debian.org>
Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: ncbi-tools6 vs. testing
From: amu@MIT.EDU (Aaron M. Ucko)
Date: 20 Sep 2001 23:22:05 -0400
Message-id: <[🔎] udlg09hqlcy.fsf@multics.mit.edu>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] udl1yl3dwkr.fsf@multics.mit.edu>
References: <[🔎] udl1yl3dwkr.fsf@multics.mit.edu>

Ah, now it's there; yay.  I'm still curious what was holding it up,
though.

-- 
Aaron M. Ucko, KB1CJC <amu@mit.edu> (finger amu@monk.mit.edu)

Reply to:

References:
- ncbi-tools6 vs. testing
  - From: Aaron Ucko <ucko@debian.org>

Prev by Date: Re: discrepancy in ISO 3166-1 country codes
Next by Date: Re: Bug#112723: Purposely broken/uninstallable packages in archive
Previous by thread: ncbi-tools6 vs. testing
Next by thread: Running dpkg -r foo from a postinst script?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread