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

Bug#97671: marked as done (xutils: why is rstart.real a conffile?)

On Fri, Jul 25, 2003 at 06:48:15AM -0500, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> Branden Robinson, in a mail to control@bugs.debian.org, wrote:
> > merge 97671 143825
> > severity normal
> > tag 97671 + help upstream
> > thanks
> As the tech ctte have resolved not to do anything about this bug,
> and two project leaders have refrained from touching it at all, you're
> evidently not going to get a more authoritative judgement on the severity
> of Bug#143825, than mine whether taken as either release manager or one
> of the BTS maintainers. If you choose not to accept this, and cannot
> get either the tech ctte or the DPL to actively support your position
> overruling my judgement, but try to downgrade the bug nevertheless,
> I'll add technical measures to stop that from happening. I'd appreciate
> it if you refrain from wasting my time or your own in such a manner.
> Closing this report with this message.

I guess you missed the part where I said:

tag 97671 + help upstream

Because 1) it is an upstream problem (the X Window System, being very
old, has some pretty stale ideas about filesystem layout) and 2) I'd
appreciate help with this bug since I have more important things to do
like get 4.3.0 into experimental (and ultimately unstable).

So, volunteers are cordially invited to take a crack at the Imake
modifications that would be necessary to fix this.  In the Release
Manager's opinion, sarge should not ship with this awful, awful,
horrible bug (hence "release-critical").

You never know what back-channel favors might accrue if you do something
to make both me *and* the Release Manager happy.  :)


G. Branden Robinson                |    Optimists believe we live in the
Debian GNU/Linux                   |    best of all possible worlds.
branden@debian.org                 |    Pessimists are afraid the optimists
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |    are right about that.

Attachment: pgpUR4hWfUgwm.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: