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

Bug#180315: marked as done (gij: apt-get remove gij leaves /usr/bin/java and /etc/alternatives/java)



Your message dated Sat, 22 Feb 2003 12:00:19 +0100
with message-id <15959.22595.536151.482012@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
and subject line Bug#180315: gij: apt-get remove gij  leaves /usr/bin/java and /etc/alternatives/java
has caused the attached Bug report 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 I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 9 Feb 2003 02:58:47 +0000
>From gpk@gpk.homeunix.net Sat Feb 08 20:58:46 2003
Return-path: <gpk@gpk.homeunix.net>
Received: from pool-138-89-19-89.mad.east.verizon.net (gpk.homeunix.net) [138.89.19.89] 
	by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
	id 18hhg6-0004ai-00; Sat, 08 Feb 2003 20:58:46 -0600
Received: from gpk by gpk.homeunix.net with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 18hhfb-0001V3-00; Sat, 08 Feb 2003 21:58:15 -0500
From: Greg Kochanski <gpk@gpk.homeunix.net>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: gij: apt-get remove gij  leaves /usr/bin/java and
	/etc/alternatives/java
X-Mailer: reportbug 1.50
Date: Sat, 08 Feb 2003 21:58:15 -0500
Message-Id: <[🔎] E18hhfb-0001V3-00@gpk.homeunix.net>
X-Spam-Prob: -1048.60000
X-Spam-Rating: 1
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.6 required=5.0
	tests=SPAM_PHRASE_00_01
	version=2.41
X-Spam-Level: 

Package: gij
Version: N/A; reported 2003-02-08
Severity: normal

apt-get remove gij

does not completely remove all files.

Notably, /usr/bin/java remains as a link to /etc/alternatives/java
and /etc/alternatives/java calls gij-3.0

-- System Information
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux gpk 2.4.20 #8 Tue Dec 17 09:01:23 EST 2002 i686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=


---------------------------------------
Received: (at 180315-done) by bugs.debian.org; 22 Feb 2003 11:00:59 +0000
>From doko@cs.tu-berlin.de Sat Feb 22 05:00:59 2003
Return-path: <doko@cs.tu-berlin.de>
Received: from mail.cs.tu-berlin.de [130.149.17.13] (root)
	by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
	id 18mXOs-0004sV-00; Sat, 22 Feb 2003 05:00:59 -0600
Received: from bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de (daemon@bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de [130.149.19.1])
	by mail.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA13006;
	Sat, 22 Feb 2003 12:00:19 +0100 (MET)
Received: (from doko@localhost)
	by bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.11.6+Sun/8.9.3) id h1MB0JQ13318;
	Sat, 22 Feb 2003 12:00:19 +0100 (MET)
From: Matthias Klose <doko@cs.tu-berlin.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <15959.22595.536151.482012@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 12:00:19 +0100
To: Greg Kochanski <gpk@gpk.homeunix.net>, 180315-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#180315: gij: apt-get remove gij  leaves /usr/bin/java and /etc/alternatives/java
In-Reply-To: <[🔎] E18hhfb-0001V3-00@gpk.homeunix.net>
References: <[🔎] E18hhfb-0001V3-00@gpk.homeunix.net>
X-Mailer: VM 7.03 under 21.4 (patch 6) "Common Lisp" XEmacs Lucid
Delivered-To: 180315-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.3 required=4.0
	tests=IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01
	version=2.44
X-Spam-Level: 

Greg Kochanski writes:
> Package: gij
> Version: N/A; reported 2003-02-08
> Severity: normal
> 
> apt-get remove gij
> 
> does not completely remove all files.
> 
> Notably, /usr/bin/java remains as a link to /etc/alternatives/java
> and /etc/alternatives/java calls gij-3.0

it's a feature, not a bug. When removing gij-3.0, then this should go
away as well.



Reply to: