Bug#112345: marked as done (tetex-bin recommends perl-tk)
Your message dated Thu, 22 Nov 2001 15:50:28 -0500
with message-id <E1670nk-00035x-00@auric.debian.org>
and subject line Bug#112345: fixed in tetex-bin 1.0.7+20001218-7
has caused the attached Bug report 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 I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 15 Sep 2001 15:55:40 +0000
>From hgebel@home.com Sat Sep 15 10:55:40 2001
Return-path: <hgebel@home.com>
Received: from (femail40.sdc1.sfba.home.com) [24.254.60.34]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 15iHnA-0004xS-00; Sat, 15 Sep 2001 10:55:40 -0500
Received: from home.com ([65.1.163.99]) by femail40.sdc1.sfba.home.com
(InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP
id <20010915155534.BRXK6031.femail40.sdc1.sfba.home.com@home.com>
for <submit@bugs.debian.org>; Sat, 15 Sep 2001 08:55:34 -0700
Received: by home.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 15 Sep 2001 11:55:33 -0400
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2001 11:55:33 -0400
From: Harry Henry Gebel <hgebel@home.com>
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Subject: tetex-bin recommends perl-tk
Message-ID: <20010915115533.A3814@home.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.20i
Organization: Landon House SBS
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Package: tetex-bin
Version: 1.0.7+20001218-5.1
Severity: wishlist
tetex-bin recommends the perl-tk package, although it seems to me that the
package works just fine without perl-tk. By recommending instead of
suggesting the package I have to deselect it every time I run dselect, and
exit dselect with 'Q'. Since not perl-tk having perl-tk does not seriously
effect tetex-bin's usefulness I think it should be downgraded to 'suggests'.
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 112345-close) by bugs.debian.org; 22 Nov 2001 20:50:28 +0000
>From troup@auric.debian.org Thu Nov 22 14:50:28 2001
Return-path: <troup@auric.debian.org>
Received: from auric.debian.org [206.246.226.45] (mail)
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 1670nk-0004Rk-00; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 14:50:28 -0600
Received: from troup by auric.debian.org with local (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 1670nk-00035x-00; Thu, 22 Nov 2001 15:50:28 -0500
From: Christoph Martin <christoph.martin@uni-mainz.de>
To: 112345-close@bugs.debian.org
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.65 $
Subject: Bug#112345: fixed in tetex-bin 1.0.7+20001218-7
Message-Id: <E1670nk-00035x-00@auric.debian.org>
Sender: James Troup <troup@auric.debian.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 15:50:28 -0500
Delivered-To: 112345-close@bugs.debian.org
We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
tetex-bin, which has been installed in the Debian FTP archive:
libkpathsea-dev_1.0.7+20001218-7_i386.deb
to pool/main/t/tetex-bin/libkpathsea-dev_1.0.7+20001218-7_i386.deb
libkpathsea3_1.0.7+20001218-7_i386.deb
to pool/main/t/tetex-bin/libkpathsea3_1.0.7+20001218-7_i386.deb
tetex-bin_1.0.7+20001218-7.diff.gz
to pool/main/t/tetex-bin/tetex-bin_1.0.7+20001218-7.diff.gz
tetex-bin_1.0.7+20001218-7.dsc
to pool/main/t/tetex-bin/tetex-bin_1.0.7+20001218-7.dsc
tetex-bin_1.0.7+20001218-7_i386.deb
to pool/main/t/tetex-bin/tetex-bin_1.0.7+20001218-7_i386.deb
A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.
Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you
have further comments please address them to 112345@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.
Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Christoph Martin <christoph.martin@uni-mainz.de> (supplier of updated tetex-bin package)
(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@debian.org)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Format: 1.7
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 14:55:54 +0100
Source: tetex-bin
Binary: tetex-bin libkpathsea-dev libkpathsea3
Architecture: source i386
Version: 1.0.7+20001218-7
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: teTeX maintainers <debian-tetex-maint@lists.debian.org>
Changed-By: Christoph Martin <christoph.martin@uni-mainz.de>
Description:
libkpathsea-dev - kpathsea.a and include files for teTeX
libkpathsea3 - shared libkpathsea for teTeX
tetex-bin - teTeX binary files
Closes: 112345 117500 117944 120301
Changes:
tetex-bin (1.0.7+20001218-7) unstable; urgency=low
.
* add special copyright statement about tex.web and mf.web to
copyrights file (closes: #117500)
* fix a bug in dvips on ia64 (closes: #117944)
* remove pre-depends on essential perl(5)-base (closes: #120301)
* suggests perl-tk instead of recommends (closes: #112345)
Files:
efb3e19aee4667f2fbaff49f921d64dc 1186 tex standard tetex-bin_1.0.7+20001218-7.dsc
b7bb557e9b6059f6f190ecfa7cfa0d22 53572 tex standard tetex-bin_1.0.7+20001218-7.diff.gz
736fa540b67e53e861f5165224488490 2551254 tex standard tetex-bin_1.0.7+20001218-7_i386.deb
e70366791e39bfa74bcb6ab6b8cd3e0a 35414 libs standard libkpathsea3_1.0.7+20001218-7_i386.deb
357bec8bb9f8dcd53b692acbdef46148 63368 devel optional libkpathsea-dev_1.0.7+20001218-7_i386.deb
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iQEVAwUBO/0LHm4/9k35XC9tAQGPcAgArVSj8b8B0vVL/Ru/s9KcWqrDibE5PLl3
5e+VocaedkkqWB+XFYG8OOCHjLUEBQGVhxl6EmJqjt0Hpw6ALYc9Ws39fvYLajjQ
lZdPB5iTesJLuF+UltlIiKeh3QK2WCh60yALhIAsToE77gJyio5f+7L8nin+70Wd
xwHHNcNz54CO6taKNWAZvcuq2OjsghrjqyJfZ3XgIOIQNzFIsweNjp3TtEayH0q/
ga503ZNCg6ChIzSZ3XFWgbdiZ+1b1LkmIbEmJOcBjtRWpQgPrM/LZEii1lSeavpI
hsatj1sJTlMvp0ebKt6Ko1VUvdQmyL48Wo6T1jsJW0CVjWmzxQMi2g==
=Udf8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: