Bug#600032: marked as done (unblock: cloog-ppl 0.15.9-2)
Your message dated Wed, 13 Oct 2010 09:32:30 +0200
with message-id <4CB5608E.7030504@dogguy.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#600032: unblock: cloog-ppl 0.15.9-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #600032,
regarding unblock: cloog-ppl 0.15.9-2
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.)
--
600032: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=600032
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: serious
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock
gcc-4.4 and gcj-4.4 in testing have a build dependency on libcloog-ppl-dev (>=
0.15.9-2~), nevertheless these packages are now in testing.
please unblock cloog-ppl 0.15.9-2 and consider unblocking gcc-4.4 4.4.5-3 and
gcj-4.4 4.4.5-2 too.
I don't think that the forced merge of #599848 and the severity of #145257 is
adequate if it's not possible to detect these issues either when migrating
packages to testing, or if no rebuild tests are made.
kthxbye and cheers, Matthias
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 10/13/2010 12:26 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: serious
> User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: unblock
>
> gcc-4.4 and gcj-4.4 in testing have a build dependency on
> libcloog-ppl-dev (>= 0.15.9-2~), nevertheless these packages are now in
> testing.
>
> please unblock cloog-ppl 0.15.9-2 and consider unblocking gcc-4.4
> 4.4.5-3 and gcj-4.4 4.4.5-2 too.
>
Unblocked.
P.S.: A fix for #600052 is more than welcome :)
Cheers,
--
Mehdi Dogguy مهدي الدڤي
http://dogguy.org/
--- End Message ---
Reply to: