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

Bug#25910: marked as done (xanim: source includes cinepak, etc modules)

Your message dated 22 Jun 1999 18:59:08 -0000
with message-id <19990622185908.8703.qmail@master.debian.org>
and subject line Bug#25910: fixed in xanim 2.80.1-3
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'm
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Ian Jackson
(administrator, Debian bugs database)

Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 18 Aug 1998 20:55:57 +0000
Received: (qmail 20861 invoked from network); 18 Aug 1998 20:55:55 -0000
Received: from kite.kitenet.net (HELO kitenet.net) (qmailr@
  by debian.novare.net with SMTP; 18 Aug 1998 20:55:55 -0000
Received: (qmail 17783 invoked by uid 500); 18 Aug 1998 20:51:16 -0000
Date: 18 Aug 1998 20:51:16 -0000
Message-ID: <19980818205116.17782.qmail@kitenet.net>
From: Joey Hess <joey@kitenet.net>
Subject: xanim: source includes cinepak, etc modules
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Mailer: bug 3.1.6

Package: xanim

The source appears to include dotofiles.tgz, that contains all 3 modules. It
also contains xa2.0_cvid_linuxELF.o and xa2.0_iv32_linuxELF.o and
xa1.0_cyuv_linuxELF.o right in the .orig.tar.gz file. Since make clean
deletes them, if you run debian/rules clean binary, you get an xanim that's
legal, if you run debian/rules binary right after unpacking, you get one
linked with the modules.

If we can't distribute them, they shouldn't be in the source tarball. If we
can distribute them, debian/README.Debian is incorrect.

-- System Information
Debian Release: 2.0
Kernel Version: Linux kite 2.1.115 #2 Fri Aug 7 23:02:26 PDT 1998 i586 unknown

Versions of the packages xanim depends on:

Reply to: