Bug#208873: marked as done (cryptoloop-source: changelog.template has illegal version number)
Your message dated Thu, 22 Apr 2004 18:27:05 +0200
with message-id <20040422162705.GA3497@djpig.de>
and subject line Packages were removed
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; 5 Sep 2003 20:09:04 +0000
>From jae@jerhard.org Fri Sep 05 15:09:00 2003
Return-path: <jae@jerhard.org>
Received: from mail-in-03.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.43]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 19vMtA-00049v-00; Fri, 05 Sep 2003 15:09:00 -0500
Received: from sanctum.jerhard.org (dialin-212-144-175-231.arcor-ip.net [212.144.175.231])
by mail-in-03.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 691D8B181D
for <submit@bugs.debian.org>; Fri, 5 Sep 2003 22:08:58 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from jae by sanctum.jerhard.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
id 19vMhe-0005R4-00; Fri, 05 Sep 2003 21:57:06 +0200
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 21:57:06 +0200
From: =?utf-8?Q?J=C3=BCrgen_A=2E?= Erhard <jae+debian@jerhard.org>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: cryptoloop-source: changelog.template has illegal version number
Message-ID: <20030905195706.GA14386@sanctum.jerhard.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw"
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Reportbug-Version: 2.24
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i
Sender: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=FCrgen_A=2E_Erhard?= <jae@jerhard.org>
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-14.3 required=4.0
tests=BAYES_10,HAS_PACKAGE,PGP_SIGNATURE_2,USER_AGENT_MUTT
autolearn=ham version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_8_27
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_8_27 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp)
--GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Package: cryptoloop-source
Version: 0.0.0+0.0.1-pre1-9
Severity: normal
For my setup, it produces version numbers like 0.1.0-2+2.4.21_sanctum.
That "_" is, according to policy 5.6.11, illegal. You could just lose the
"tr - _" call in your rules file, and be done. With that.
Please take a look at other modules, like alsa-driver, and how they use
KVERS and KDREV.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux sanctum 2.4.21-sanctum #1 Mon Aug 11 23:46:15 CEST 2003 i686
Locale: LANG=3DC, LC_CTYPE=3DC
Versions of packages cryptoloop-source depends on:
ii bash 2.05b-8.1 The GNU Bourne Again SHell
ii build-essential 9.5.1 informational list of build-es=
sent
ii cryptoapi-core-source 0.1.0-4 CryptoAPI core kernel module
ii grep-dctrl 1.101 Grep Debian package information
ii kernel-patch-scripts 0.99.27 Scripts to help dealing with p=
acka
ii patch 2.5.9-1 Apply a diff file to an origin=
al
-- no debconf information
--=20
J=C3=BCrgen A. Erhard
MARS http://mars.jerhard.org
"With Microsoft products, failure is not an option - it's a standard
component." -- Derek Glidden
--GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE/WOqSN0B+CS56qs0RAhx7AJ9VZQWug+bM3ArBx0swXppqBzHXqACfQY6R
y60fZMoWqgkHYBHkqoGmxGA=
=p0aB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw--
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 208873-done) by bugs.debian.org; 22 Apr 2004 16:27:12 +0000
>From frank@lichtenheld.de Thu Apr 22 09:27:12 2004
Return-path: <frank@lichtenheld.de>
Received: from mail.sorgfalt.net [217.160.169.191]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1BGh2e-0002Mf-00; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 09:27:12 -0700
Received: from p50839807.dip.t-dialin.net ([80.131.152.7] helo=djpig.djpig.de)
by mail.sorgfalt.net with asmtp
(Cipher TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 3.35 (Sorgfalt))
id 1BGh2d-0003sH-00; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 18:27:11 +0200
Received: from djpig by djpig.djpig.de with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
id 1BGh2X-0002cY-00; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 18:27:05 +0200
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 18:27:05 +0200
From: Frank Lichtenheld <djpig@debian.org>
To: 212145-done@bugs.debian.org, 200562-done@bugs.debian.org,
208873-done@bugs.debian.org, 208882-done@bugs.debian.org,
209075-done@bugs.debian.org, 210268-done@bugs.debian.org,
215435-done@bugs.debian.org, 169044-done@bugs.debian.org,
203538-done@bugs.debian.org, 200561-done@bugs.debian.org,
210267-done@bugs.debian.org, 211930-done@bugs.debian.org,
169038-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Packages were removed
Message-ID: <20040422162705.GA3497@djpig.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
Sender: Frank Lichtenheld <frank@lichtenheld.de>
Delivered-To: 208873-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no
version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level:
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 6
The cryptoapi-core-source and cryptoloop-source packages were
removed from Debian unstable yesterday so I close their remaining bugs.
[Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2004 18:37:55 -0400] [ftpmaster: James Troup]
Removed the following packages from unstable:
cryptoapi-core-source | 0.1.0-5 | source, all
cryptoloop-source | 0.0.0+0.0.1-pre1-10 | source, all
Closed bugs: 242245
------------------- Reason -------------------
ROM; unmaintained, don't apply to modern kernel.
----------------------------------------------
Gruesse,
--
Frank Lichtenheld <djpig@debian.org>
www: http://www.djpig.de/
Reply to: