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

Bug#509760: marked as done (release-notes: exim has been obsoleted in etch, no need to mention for lenny)

Your message dated Thu, 15 Jan 2009 13:12:49 +0100
with message-id <20090115121248.GA11326@merkur.sol.de>
and subject line Re: Bug#509759: release-notes: leftover files in /usr/X11R6/bin only applicable for XFree86->Xorg transition
has caused the Debian Bug report #509759,
regarding release-notes: exim has been obsoleted in etch, no need to mention for lenny
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org

509759: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=509759
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release-notes
Severity: minor


The subject says it all, I thing the section about upgrading from exim 
to exim4 should be removed.


-- System Information:
Debian Release: 5.0
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.26-1-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=ro_RO.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=ro_RO.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
(Albert Einstein)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Andrei,

On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 10:33:50AM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> retitle 509759 release-notes: bug in 'make updatepo'?
> thanks
> Uh, it seems at least this entry has been removed in the English 
> version, but is still present in a lot of languages:
> 'make updatepo' says there is nothing to be done. Unfortunately I don't 
> know enough about makefiles to propose a patch :/

you're right. The problem was that "make updatepo" respected the timestamps
of PO and dependent en/*.dbk files. If the PO file was newer is wasn't touched
by po4a. I fixed this in r5703.


--- End Message ---

Reply to: