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

Bug#928994: marked as done (unblock: t50/5.8.3-2)

Your message dated Fri, 17 May 2019 07:01:00 +0000
with message-id <20d4b6b1-f029-ed45-3121-781ccab61950@thykier.net>
and subject line Re: Bug#928994: unblock: t50/5.8.3-2
has caused the Debian Bug report #928994,
regarding unblock: t50/5.8.3-2
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.)


-- 
928994: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=928994
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

Hello,

I'm asking for the unblock of t50
because a critical bug was solved in the last upload.

The change consists of an update to an already existing quilt patch, and it is removing architecture specific code from the Makefile.

Bug report: #928991
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=928991

Thanks,


--
Samuel Henrique <samueloph>

Attachment: t50.debdiff
Description: Binary data


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Samuel Henrique:
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: unblock
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I'm asking for the unblock of t50
> because a critical bug was solved in the last upload.
> 
> The change consists of an update to an already existing quilt patch, and it
> is removing architecture specific code from the Makefile.
> 
> Bug report: #928991
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=928991
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 

Unblocked, thanks.
~Niels

--- End Message ---
Reply to: