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

Bug#293974: marked as done (icewm is not using the configuration created by icepref)

Your message dated Wed, 9 Aug 2006 21:11:38 +0200
with message-id <20060809191138.GA21252@deprecation.cyrius.com>
and subject line 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)
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: icepref
Version: 1.1-17
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable


icepref creates ~/.icewm/preferences
Icewm is not by default using that file, so configuration changes are 
not visible, and therefore icepref is practically useless for normal 
users.

I use debian unstable.

I suggest the icepref package is removed and replaced with for example 
icewmcp (icewm control panel) or icepref2.


-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i586)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.10-grsec
Locale: LANG=sv_SE.ISO-8859-15, LC_CTYPE=sv_SE (charmap=ISO-8859-1)

Versions of packages icepref depends on:
ii  icewm                         1.2.20-1   wonderful Win95-OS/2-Motif-like wi
ii  icewm-common                  1.2.20-1   wonderful Win95-OS/2-Motif-like wi
ii  python                        2.3.4-6    An interactive high-level object-o
ii  python-gtk-1.2                0.6.12-2   GTK support module for Python

-- no debconf information

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
icepref has been removed from Debian because it is "orphaned,
outdated", see #227077.
-- 
Martin Michlmayr
http://www.cyrius.com/

--- End Message ---
Reply to: