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

Bug#683244: marked as done (nmu: bobcat_3.01.00-1)

Your message dated Sat, 08 Sep 2012 16:53:58 +0100
with message-id <1347119638.8753.58.camel@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#683244: Bug#682640: binNMU
has caused the Debian Bug report #683244,
regarding nmu: bobcat_3.01.00-1
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.)


-- 
683244: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=683244
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 bobcat_3.01.00-1 . ALL . -m "recompilation with current g++ (closes: #683049)"

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 6.0.5
  APT prefers stable-updates
  APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'proposed-updates'), (500, 'stable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Mon, 2012-08-27 at 22:06 -0700, tony mancill wrote:
> On 08/18/2012 05:03 AM, Neil Williams wrote:
> > Just to help those scanning the RC bug lists, the binNMU request for
> > bobcat is #683244. The binNMU for c++-annotations would need to be
> > requested later.
> > 
> > I've done a simple test in a pbuilder chroot and the principle of the
> > request does fix these two RC bugs.
[...]
> Thank you for verifying the proposed binNMU.  Any advice on how to
> proceed with this for bobcat from the maintainer perspective?

We'd still like to know what actually caused the issue, really.  "Some
unknown issue that seems to have gone away now" doesn't fill one with
huge amounts of confidence.

In any case, to keep things moving I've scheduled binNMUs for bobcat.
Note that binNMUs can't close bugs, so if the binNMUs are successful
then you'll need to take care of closing #683049 yourself.

If further binNMUs for c++-annotations are still required, please
request those via a new bug, once the bobcat binNMUs have successfully
built everywhere.

Regards,

Adam

--- End Message ---
Reply to: