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

Bug#686197: marked as done (unblock: rhn-client-tools/1.8.9-2)

Your message dated Tue, 18 Sep 2012 19:51:07 +0100
with message-id <1347994267.18378.4.camel@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#686197: unblock: rhnsd/4.9.15-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #686197,
regarding unblock: rhn-client-tools/1.8.9-2
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

686197: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=686197
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: unblock


rhnsd was uploaded before the freeze, did not have any RC bugs and
looking at http://packages.qa.debian.org/r/rhnsd.html and similar sites
I can't see a reason why it was not unblocked automatically to migrate
to testing as the other packages which were uploaded around that time.

As this is the only missing piece to add spacewalk client support to
wheezy, it would be great if you could unblock it.



unblock rhnsd/4.9.15-1

 Bernd Zeimetz                            Debian GNU/Linux Developer
 http://bzed.de                                http://www.debian.org
 GPG Fingerprint: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485  DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Thu, 2012-09-13 at 01:14 +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> > (Leaving aside arguments as to whether we should be introducing new
> > packages now, ) an unblock wouldn't help.  There may not have been any
> > bugs filed against the package but it /is/ buggy, which is why it failed
> > to migrate during the month that it had an automatic exception:
> thanks for the explanation - indeed I missed that piece while looking for
> reasons why the migration did not happen and there was no bug, so nobody noticed
> it. As python-ethtool will never work on !linux architectures, we've removed the
> strict dependency on it in rhn-client-tools. The diff is rather simple, so I
> would appreciate if you could unblock rhn-client-tools/1.8.9-2 instead. The diff
> between -1 and -2 is attached.

Unblocked; thanks.



--- End Message ---

Reply to: