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

Bug#570346: marked as done (nmu: gnucash_2.2.9-4)

Your message dated Thu, 18 Feb 2010 12:58:31 +0100
with message-id <877hqag3h4.fsf@solon.marcbrockschmidt.de>
and subject line Re: Bug#570346: nmu: gnucash_2.2.9-4
has caused the Debian Bug report #570346,
regarding nmu: gnucash_2.2.9-4
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.)


-- 
570346: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=570346
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu

nmu gnucash_2.2.9-4 . ALL . -m "Rebuilt against libgoffice-0.8 to account for uncoordinated soname bump (closes: #570152)"

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Micha Lenk <micha@lenk.info> writes:
> nmu gnucash_2.2.9-4 . ALL . -m "Rebuilt against libgoffice-0.8 to account for uncoordinated soname bump (closes: #570152)"

*sigh*

I'm amazed that the libgoffice-0.8 package is first containing a 
/usr/lib/libgoffice-0.8.so.7 and then /usr/lib/libgoffice-0.8.so.8. 

lintian actually warns about this (serious!) bug in the packaging and it
still went into the archive. Please fix the package name to correctly
encode the SONAME.

I've scheduled binNMUs for all r-deps of goffice that haven't been
rebuild since its last upload:
abiword gnucash nip2

Marc
-- 
BOFH #410:
Electrical conduits in machine room are melting.

Attachment: pgpMdCT1x8DYJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature


--- End Message ---
Reply to: