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

Bug#606228: marked as done (future unblock: whohas/0.24-2)



Your message dated Tue, 07 Dec 2010 16:27:03 +0000
with message-id <1291739223.14098.455.camel@hathi.jungle.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#606228: future unblock: whohas/0.24-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #606228,
regarding future unblock: whohas/0.24-2
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.)


-- 
606228: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=606228
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: freeze-exception

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Please consider unblocking whohas to fix four bugs, assuming that nothing else
is filed while it ages.

Although they're not all marked in the BTS as RC bugs, they do fix otherwise
broken functionality that results from other distributions making releases
(how dare they!). They are Debian-specific patches presently since upstream's
release history is very sporadic.

Here's the changelog with relevant bugs:

whohas (0.24-2) unstable; urgency=low

   * New patch 70-fedora-version to search Fedora 14 (Closes: #575909)
   * New patch to update openSUSE search URLs (Closes: #585596) - thanks
     to Guillaume Delacour
   * New patch to update OpenBSD search URLs (Closes: #586537) - thanks
     to Guillaume Delacour <gui@iroqwa.org>
   * New patch to update Arch search URLs (Closes: #561536) - thanks to
     Guillaume Delacour <gui@iroqwa.org>
   * Update my email address and remove DMUA flag
   * Standards version 3.9.1 (no changes required)

 -- Jonathan Wiltshire <jmw@debian.org>  Sun, 05 Dec 2010 22:13:15 +0000


unblock whohas/0.24-2

- -- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
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=n5oD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 15:43 +0000, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote:
> Please consider unblocking whohas to fix four bugs, assuming that nothing else
> is filed while it ages.
> 
> Although they're not all marked in the BTS as RC bugs, they do fix otherwise
> broken functionality that results from other distributions making releases
> (how dare they!). They are Debian-specific patches presently since upstream's
> release history is very sporadic.

$ grep-excuses whohas
whohas (0.24-1 to 0.24-2)
    Maintainer: Jonathan Wiltshire 
    Too young, only 1 of 10 days old
    Ignoring block request by freeze, due to unblock request by mehdi

i.e. already done. :-)

Regards,

Adam



--- End Message ---

Reply to: