Bug#697619: Processed: found 697619 in 0.110
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 10:48:46PM +0200, Michael Prokop wrote:
> * Adam D. Barratt [Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 09:20:04PM +0100]:
> > On Tue, 2013-04-23 at 22:17 +0200, Michael Prokop wrote:
> > > * Adam D. Barratt [Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 09:03:26PM +0100]:
> > > > What's the issue with the fix? If we need another upload for i-t for r0
> > > > then it'll need to be soon. :-|
>
> > > We've 0.109.1 which fixes that in wheezy and unstable, shouldn't
> > > this be enough? Is experimental's 0.110 of i-t an issue WRT to r0?
> > > I'd push a 0.111 release to experimental immediately then.
>
> > Bah, I misread the versions and thought it was affecting the recent
> > upload to sid; sorry for the noise.
>
> No worries, I've just released and uploaded i-t v0.111 which
> includes the fixes which went into wheezy (thanks for that, Ben) to
> avoid further confusion.
Thanks!
If you have time, could I talk you into uploading an updated backport
for squeeze-backports, as well, to address this issue and 689830?
- Josh Triplett
Reply to: