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

Bug#195886: marked as done (FTBFS (unstable/all): Fails to unpack source archive during build)



Your message dated 10 Aug 2004 00:51:55 -0700
with message-id <87pt5zjuqs.fsf@becket.becket.net>
and subject line bugs done
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; 3 Jun 2003 05:21:06 +0000
>From adconrad@0c3.net Tue Jun 03 00:21:05 2003
Return-path: <adconrad@0c3.net>
Received: from h68-145-107-190.cg.shawcable.net (lucifer.0c3.net) [68.145.107.190] 
	by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 19N4EL-0004Er-00; Tue, 03 Jun 2003 00:21:05 -0500
Received: from adconrad by lucifer.0c3.net with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
	id 19N4EK-0007XC-00; Mon, 02 Jun 2003 23:21:04 -0600
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Adam Conrad <adconrad@0c3.net>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: FTBFS (unstable/all): Fails to unpack source archive during build
X-Mailer: reportbug 2.10.1
Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2003 23:21:04 -0600
Message-Id: <E19N4EK-0007XC-00@lucifer.0c3.net>
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0
	tests=BAYES_01,HAS_PACKAGE
	version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_05_24
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_05_24 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp)

Package: atmelwlandriver
Version: 2.1.1-3
Severity: serious

As you can see from the buildd logs[1], your package fails to build from source
with the following error on all architectures:

------------
dpkg-source: extracting atmelwlandriver in atmelwlandriver-2.1.1
patch: **** File src/Pcmcia_Pci/ is not a regular file -- can't patch
dpkg-source: failure: patch gave error exit status 2
FAILED [dpkg-source died]
------------

Please resolve this and upload a new version.

... Adam

[1] http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?&pkg=atmelwlandriver

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: powerpc
Kernel: Linux lucifer 2.4.20 #1 Sat Dec 28 20:41:54 MST 2002 ppc
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C


---------------------------------------
Received: (at 195886-done) by bugs.debian.org; 10 Aug 2004 07:51:56 +0000
>From tb@becket.net Tue Aug 10 00:51:56 2004
Return-path: <tb@becket.net>
Received: from vp085189.reshsg.uci.edu (becket.becket.net) [128.195.85.189] 
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1BuRQK-0000ya-00; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:51:56 -0700
Received: from tb by becket.becket.net with local (Exim 4.34)
	id 1BuRQK-0005UO-0Z; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 00:51:56 -0700
To: 195886-done@bugs.debian.org, 201053-done@bugs.debian.org,
        209040-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: bugs done
X-Reply-Permission: Posted or emailed replies to this message constitute
		 permission for an emailed response.
X-PGP-Fingerprint: 1F0A1E51  63 28 EB DA E6 44 E5 5E  EC F3 04 26 4E BF 1A 92
X-Windows: The Cutting Edge of Obsolescence.
From: Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net>
Date: 10 Aug 2004 00:51:55 -0700
Message-ID: <87pt5zjuqs.fsf@becket.becket.net>
Lines: 4
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Delivered-To: 195886-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=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no 
	version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level: 


These bugs were fixed by NMUs 2.1.1-3.1, 2.1.1-3.2, and 2.1.1-3.3, and
were accepted when QA took the package at 2.1.1-4.



Reply to: