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

Bug#706311: marked as done (unblock: libpano13/2.9.18+dfsg-5)

Your message dated Sun, 28 Apr 2013 18:23:24 +0100
with message-id <1367169804.13168.122.camel@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#706311: unblock: libpano13/2.9.18+dfsg-5
has caused the Debian Bug report #706311,
regarding unblock: libpano13/2.9.18+dfsg-5
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.)


-- 
706311: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=706311
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

On 2013-04-27 "Adam D. Barratt" <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-04-27 at 09:21 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
>> On Sat, 2013-04-27 at 01:45 +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
>>> a few Multi-Arch: same packages have all their dependencies satisfied,
>>> but are not co-installable because they got binNMUs. A sourceful
>>> no-change upload to rebuild them should restore co-installability.
>>> I've identified 8 source packages where this would help:
> [...]
>> Note that such issues are not RC for wheezy. If the maintainers are
>> interested in fixing them, I might be minded to accept such changes, but
>> it would need to be /very/ soon. I have to admit to being concerned
>> about changes that might be introduced by a rebuild of a package in
>> unstable after several months though...

> Alternatively, we can look at fixing these issues for the first point
> release. That gives us more time to evaluate any potential side-effects
> of the rebuilds.

Hello,
FWIW I have uploaded libpano13/2.9.18+dfsg-5 (no source changes, just a
rebuild). If you choose to not delay the co-installability fix to r1
you will need to unblock libpano13/2.9.18+dfsg-5.

For this specific package the last rebuild was about a year ago.

cu Andreas
-- 
`What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are
so grateful to you.'
`I sew his ears on from time to time, sure'

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Sun, 2013-04-28 at 11:12 +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> FWIW I have uploaded libpano13/2.9.18+dfsg-5 (no source changes, just a
> rebuild). If you choose to not delay the co-installability fix to r1
> you will need to unblock libpano13/2.9.18+dfsg-5.
> 
> For this specific package the last rebuild was about a year ago.

The binary dependencies look okay; unblocked and aged.

Regards,

Adam

--- End Message ---
Reply to: