Bug#189984: marked as done (openoffice.org-debian-files: Another typo in the menu file)
Your message dated Tue, 22 Apr 2003 10:18:04 -0400
with message-id <E197yay-00031V-00@auric.debian.org>
and subject line Bug#189984: fixed in openoffice.org-debian-files 1.0.3-2+1
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; 21 Apr 2003 09:52:36 +0000
>From peterco@gmx.net Mon Apr 21 04:52:27 2003
Return-path: <peterco@gmx.net>
Received: from sleet.ispgateway.de [62.67.200.125]
by master.debian.org with smtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 197XyH-00058C-00; Mon, 21 Apr 2003 04:52:21 -0500
Received: (qmail 12326 invoked from network); 21 Apr 2003 09:52:20 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO jaguar) (060047@[217.233.97.109]) (envelope-sender <peterco@gmx.net>)
by sleet.ispgateway.de (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP
for <submit@bugs.debian.org>; 21 Apr 2003 09:52:20 -0000
Received: from peter by jaguar with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
id 197XyE-0000aT-00; Mon, 21 Apr 2003 11:52:18 +0200
From: Peter Colberg <peterco@gmx.net>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: openoffice.org-debian-files: Another typo in the menu file
X-Mailer: reportbug 1.50
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 11:52:18 +0200
Message-Id: <[🔎] E197XyE-0000aT-00@jaguar>
Sender: Peter Colberg <peterco@gmx.net>
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.1 required=4.0
tests=HAS_PACKAGE,PATCH_UNIFIED_DIFF,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01
version=2.44
X-Spam-Level:
Package: openoffice.org-debian-files
Version: 1.0.3-1+1
Severity: normal
Tags: patch
Hi,
there's a backslash missing in the new oohtml menu item which causes
update-menus to fail parsing the file.
--- openoffice.org-debian-files Mon Apr 14 10:18:22 2003
+++ /usr/lib/menu/openoffice.org-debian-files Mon Apr 21 00:14:06 2003
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@
?package(openoffice.org-debian-files):needs=X11 section=Apps/Editors\
title="Openoffice.org HTML Editor" command="/usr/bin/oohtml"\
- hints="Internet, HTML"
+ hints="Internet, HTML"\
icon="/usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32/apps/ooo_writer.xpm"
?package(openoffice.org-debian-files):needs=X11 section=Apps/Math\
-- System Information
Debian Release: 3.0
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux jaguar 2.4.20 #1 Sat Apr 19 00:31:59 CEST 2003 i686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=de_DE
Versions of packages openoffice.org-debian-files depends on:
ii openoffice.org 1.0.3-2 high-quality office productivity s
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 189984-close) by bugs.debian.org; 22 Apr 2003 14:23:06 +0000
>From katie@auric.debian.org Tue Apr 22 09:23:05 2003
Return-path: <katie@auric.debian.org>
Received: from auric.debian.org [206.246.226.45] (mail)
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 197yfp-0003VE-00; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 09:23:05 -0500
Received: from katie by auric.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 197yay-00031V-00; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 10:18:04 -0400
From: Chris Halls <halls@debian.org>
To: 189984-close@bugs.debian.org
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.33 $
Subject: Bug#189984: fixed in openoffice.org-debian-files 1.0.3-2+1
Message-Id: <E197yay-00031V-00@auric.debian.org>
Sender: Archive Administrator <katie@auric.debian.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 10:18:04 -0400
Delivered-To: 189984-close@bugs.debian.org
We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
openoffice.org-debian-files, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:
openoffice.org-debian-files_1.0.3-2+1.dsc
to pool/contrib/o/openoffice.org-debian-files/openoffice.org-debian-files_1.0.3-2+1.dsc
openoffice.org-debian-files_1.0.3-2+1.tar.gz
to pool/contrib/o/openoffice.org-debian-files/openoffice.org-debian-files_1.0.3-2+1.tar.gz
openoffice.org-debian-files_1.0.3-2+1_all.deb
to pool/contrib/o/openoffice.org-debian-files/openoffice.org-debian-files_1.0.3-2+1_all.deb
A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.
Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you
have further comments please address them to 189984@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.
Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Chris Halls <halls@debian.org> (supplier of updated openoffice.org-debian-files package)
(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@debian.org)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 14:56:08 +0200
Source: openoffice.org-debian-files
Binary: openoffice.org-debian-files
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.0.3-2+1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian OpenOffice Team <debian-openoffice@lists.debian.org>
Changed-By: Chris Halls <halls@debian.org>
Description:
openoffice.org-debian-files - Debian specific parts of OpenOffice.org package
Closes: 189118 189269 189984
Changes:
openoffice.org-debian-files (1.0.3-2+1) unstable; urgency=low
.
* Fix several spelling errors in README.Debian (closes: #189118)
* Fix menu file typo (closes: #189984)
* Remove duplicate KDE menu entries (closes: #189269)
Files:
94a18abd032af30aa95961263b3982e5 750 contrib/editors optional openoffice.org-debian-files_1.0.3-2+1.dsc
a4c7740d7e99c68f99bf1830685168d6 18519 contrib/editors optional openoffice.org-debian-files_1.0.3-2+1.tar.gz
d456f1b4d42f392fbe77432352c15c74 19964 contrib/editors optional openoffice.org-debian-files_1.0.3-2+1_all.deb
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+pT69exmdExmX588RAiomAJsFNt4RELIW97P38S7CZB/+/htq2wCfYCZS
8pilsqaZImajOAJlwnX5guM=
=XheM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: