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

Bug#216534: marked as done (mmake: dependency on essential package)



Your message dated Tue, 17 Aug 2004 04:47:19 -0400
with message-id <E1Bwzcl-0002Ut-00@newraff.debian.org>
and subject line Bug#216534: fixed in mmake 2.2.1-4
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; 19 Oct 2003 14:15:58 +0000
>From bunk@fs.tum.de Sun Oct 19 09:15:57 2003
Return-path: <bunk@fs.tum.de>
Received: from emailhub.stusta.mhn.de (mailhub.stusta.mhn.de) [141.84.69.5] 
	by master.debian.org with smtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1ABELd-0007Km-00; Sun, 19 Oct 2003 09:15:57 -0500
Received: (qmail 23927 invoked from network); 19 Oct 2003 14:15:56 -0000
Received: from r063144.stusta.swh.mhn.de (10.150.63.144)
  by mailhub.stusta.mhn.de with SMTP; 19 Oct 2003 14:15:56 -0000
Received: from bunk by r063144.stusta.swh.mhn.de with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
	id 1ABEL9-00010A-00; Sun, 19 Oct 2003 16:15:27 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@fs.tum.de>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: mmake: dependency on essential package
X-Mailer: reportbug 2.34
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2003 16:15:27 +0200
Message-Id: <E1ABEL9-00010A-00@r063144.stusta.swh.mhn.de>
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0
	tests=BAYES_30,HAS_PACKAGE
	version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_10_18
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_10_18 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp)

Package: mmake
Version: 2.2.1-2
Severity: normal

mmake has an unversioned dependency on the essential
findutils package.

Section 3.5. of your policy says:

<--  snip  -->

...
     Packages are not required to declare any dependencies they have on
     other packages which are marked `Essential' (see below), and should
     not do so unless they depend on a particular version of that package.
...

<--  snip  -->


BTW: lintian gives an error message for this issue.



---------------------------------------
Received: (at 216534-close) by bugs.debian.org; 17 Aug 2004 08:54:03 +0000
>From katie@ftp-master.debian.org Tue Aug 17 01:54:03 2004
Return-path: <katie@ftp-master.debian.org>
Received: from newraff.debian.org [208.185.25.31] (mail)
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1BwzjH-0000xN-00; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 01:54:03 -0700
Received: from katie by newraff.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1Bwzcl-0002Ut-00; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 04:47:19 -0400
From: Ola Lundqvist <opal@debian.org>
To: 216534-close@bugs.debian.org
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.51 $
Subject: Bug#216534: fixed in mmake 2.2.1-4
Message-Id: <E1Bwzcl-0002Ut-00@newraff.debian.org>
Sender: Archive Administrator <katie@ftp-master.debian.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 04:47:19 -0400
Delivered-To: 216534-close@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=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER 
	autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level: 
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 2

Source: mmake
Source-Version: 2.2.1-4

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
mmake, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

mmake_2.2.1-4.diff.gz
  to pool/main/m/mmake/mmake_2.2.1-4.diff.gz
mmake_2.2.1-4.dsc
  to pool/main/m/mmake/mmake_2.2.1-4.dsc
mmake_2.2.1-4_all.deb
  to pool/main/m/mmake/mmake_2.2.1-4_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 216534@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Ola Lundqvist <opal@debian.org> (supplier of updated mmake 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, 17 Aug 2004 09:43:19 +0200
Source: mmake
Binary: mmake
Architecture: source all
Version: 2.2.1-4
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian QA Group <packages@qa.debian.org>
Changed-By: Ola Lundqvist <opal@debian.org>
Description: 
 mmake      - Makefile generator for Java programs
Closes: 199875 216534 255955
Changes: 
 mmake (2.2.1-4) unstable; urgency=low
 .
   * QA upload.
   * Made depends on findutils versioned, closes: #216534.
   * Updated standards version from 3.0.1 to 3.6.1.
   * Updated copyright file so it include GPL in a correct way, closes: #255955.
   * Applied patch from Matt Zimmerman <mdz@debian.org> to allow output
     of other file than Makefile, closes: #199875.
   * Removed emacs variables from bottom of this changelog.
   * Removed dh_make examples from debian dir.
   * Made build depends indep instead of build depends.
   * Changed recommends from java-compiler to jikes | java-compiler.
   * Remved dh_suidregister from debian/rules.
Files: 
 e33cda767b41d9617aa8dd45d3f765bf 561 devel extra mmake_2.2.1-4.dsc
 5f7029462dbe31cc8ec89d980a037850 3712 devel extra mmake_2.2.1-4.diff.gz
 5c41b6bfa8075375f4db6ff8e9d2a7ea 25480 devel extra mmake_2.2.1-4_all.deb

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBIcJJGKGxzw/lPdkRAmBJAJ9MhwJbQzP8lk86ZZyd1BSVfPx7EgCgjlPV
I9Uk7SkuBjb26WkK1K7EuDM=
=BSqs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Reply to: