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

Bug#459660: marked as done (deleted remote calendar resource is still synchronized)



Your message dated Sat, 24 Apr 2010 18:56:48 -0400
with message-id <h2g9f694b821004241556s6cdd018ja1c1cbafb6741ba9@mail.gmail.com>
and subject line Re: About bug # 459660 in Debian BTS
has caused the Debian Bug report #459660,
regarding deleted remote calendar resource is still synchronized
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 this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
459660: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=459660
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: korganizer
Version: 4:3.5.8-1
Severity: normal

--- Please enter the report below this line. ---
I played with importing calendars in ical format. I did with one, but it 
didn't work (permission problem), so I immediately removed the new calendar 
resource. in the create dialog I configured the resource to refresh every 
hour. Since that I get a notification every hour that the calendar file from 
the url cannot be read (caused by the permission problem mentioned above).

--- System information. ---
Architecture: amd64
Kernel:       Linux 2.6.23-2-1

Debian Release: lenny/sid
  500 unstable        www.debian-multimedia.org 
  500 unstable        mi.mirror.garr.it 
  500 unstable        ftp.tuke.sk 
  500 unstable        ftp.de.debian.org 
  500 unstable        ftp.at.debian.org 
  500 unstable        debian.inode.at 

--- Package information. ---
Depends                            (Version) | Installed
============================================-+-======================
kdelibs4c2a                   (>= 4:3.5.7-1) | 4:3.5.8.dfsg.1-5
libart-2.0-2                     (>= 2.3.18) | 2.3.19-3
libaudio2                                    | 1.9.1-1
libc6                           (>= 2.6.1-1) | 2.7-5
libfontconfig1                    (>= 2.4.0) | 2.5.0-2
libfreetype6                      (>= 2.3.5) | 2.3.5-1+b1
libgcc1                         (>= 1:4.2.1) | 1:4.3-20080104-1
libice6                         (>= 1:1.0.0) | 2:1.0.4-1
libidn11                         (>= 0.5.18) | 1.1-1
libjpeg62                                    | 6b-14
libkcal2b                       (>= 4:3.5.8) | 4:3.5.8-1
libkdepim1a                     (>= 4:3.5.8) | 4:3.5.8-1
libkpimexchange1                (>= 4:3.5.8) | 4:3.5.8-1
libkpimidentities1              (>= 4:3.5.8) | 4:3.5.8-1
libpng12-0                     (>= 1.2.13-4) | 1.2.15~beta5-3
libqt3-mt                       (>= 3:3.3.7) | 3:3.3.7-9
libsm6                                       | 2:1.0.3-1+b1
libstdc++6                        (>= 4.2.1) | 4.3-20080104-1
libx11-6                                     | 2:1.0.3-7
libxcursor1                       (>> 1.1.2) | 1:1.1.9-1
libxext6                                     | 1:1.0.3-2
libxft2                           (>> 2.1.1) | 2.1.12-2
libxi6                                       | 2:1.1.3-1
libxinerama1                                 | 1:1.0.2-1
libxrandr2                      (>= 2:1.2.0) | 2:1.2.2-1
libxrender1                                  | 1:0.9.4-1
libxt6                                       | 1:1.0.5-3
zlib1g                 (>= 1:1.2.3.3.dfsg-1) | 1:1.2.3.3.dfsg-8
perl                                         | 5.8.8-12




--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
No answer from submitter since a month. Closing this report
Olivier

2010/3/20 Olivier Vitrat <ovit.debian@gmail.com>:
> Hello
> You've reported the following bug in Debian BTS:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=459660
>
> Are you able to reproduce it with a recent version of the package ?
> If yes, which version ?
> if no, can we close this old bug report ?
>
> thanks
> Olivier
>


--- End Message ---

Reply to: