Michael Meskes wrote:
> Decide what? Which software is broken? Or whether this is a bug?
to decide, if it is a bug in linux-modules-extra-2.6 or not.
> Of course the reason matters, but the bug simply was about a binary
> package not being available.
no, read again. #441146 is about including some definition files into
linux-modules-extra-2.6, not more, not less. as this was done, the bug
> IMO the only way to fix this is to deliver
> the package.
are you really not getting it? the /new/ problem is a problem in
virtualbox-ose-source. it has absolutely nothing to do with
linux-modules-extra-2.6. it can not be fixed in linux-modulex-extra-2.6.
that is why it is not a bug in linux-modules-extra-2.6.
> Fine with me. I don't mind having this bug reassigned. To be honest in
> my opinion we should have two open bugs, one against
> virtualbox-ose-source and one against linux-modules-extra-2.6 with the
> latter one being blocked by the former. I still disagree with you guys
> closing the bug though, though.
no. the fact that virtualbox-ose-source does not comply with
linux-modulex-extra-2.6 is a bug in virtualbox-ose-source, not in
> Just for the record we should note that this bug
> had neither been reported against virtualbox-ose-source nor even
> communicated with the package maintainers.
theoretically, i communicated it to myself *scnr* :)
Address: Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562 Biberist