Bug#195643: marked as done (dependency on tetex-bin)
Your message dated Wed, 23 Jul 2003 20:33:27 +0200
with message-id <20030723183327.GE656@preusse-16223.user.cis.dfn.de>
and subject line (fwd) Re: (fwd) Bug#195643: dependency on tetex-bin
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; 1 Jun 2003 07:08:39 +0000
>From doko@cs.tu-berlin.de Sun Jun 01 02:08:38 2003
Return-path: <doko@cs.tu-berlin.de>
Received: from mail.cs.tu-berlin.de [130.149.17.13]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 19MMxJ-00050S-00; Sun, 01 Jun 2003 02:08:37 -0500
Received: from bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de (daemon@bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de [130.149.19.1])
by mail.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA28739
for <submit@bugs.debian.org>; Sun, 1 Jun 2003 09:05:13 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: (from doko@localhost)
by bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.11.6+Sun/8.9.3) id h5175DD27064;
Sun, 1 Jun 2003 09:05:13 +0200 (MEST)
From: Matthias Klose <doko@cs.tu-berlin.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <16089.42409.158935.653821@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 09:05:13 +0200
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Subject: dependency on tetex-bin
X-Mailer: VM 7.03 under 21.4 (patch 6) "Common Lisp" XEmacs Lucid
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-11.7 required=4.0
tests=BAYES_20,HAS_PACKAGE,USER_AGENT_VM
autolearn=ham version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_05_24
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_05_24 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp)
Package: tetex-base
Version: 2.0.2-x
Severity: important
With each tetex-bin upload the autobuilders cannot build packages with
tetex-bin in it's build dependency list. This lasts until the last
architecture has built tetex-bin. I doubt that in tetex-base a
dependency on tetex-bin (<= 2.0.2-3) is really necessary. At least I
cannot find anything in the changelogs. Please tighten the dependency
only, if it's necessary and keep it for the last tetex-bin version in
the repository (i.e. <= 2.0.2-2).
Thanks, Matthias
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 195643-close) by bugs.debian.org; 23 Jul 2003 18:49:46 +0000
>From hille42@web.de Wed Jul 23 13:49:44 2003
Return-path: <hille42@web.de>
Received: from smtp03.web.de (smtp.web.de) [217.72.192.158]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 19fOgK-0006aY-00; Wed, 23 Jul 2003 13:49:44 -0500
Received: from [213.7.210.197] (helo=preusse-16223.user.cis.dfn.de)
by smtp.web.de with asmtp (WEB.DE 4.99 #420)
id 19fOgI-0005Tw-00
for 195643-close@bugs.debian.org; Wed, 23 Jul 2003 20:49:43 +0200
Received: by preusse-16223.user.cis.dfn.de (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 389554769; Wed, 23 Jul 2003 20:33:27 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 20:33:27 +0200
From: Hilmar Preusse <hille42@web.de>
To: 195643-close@bugs.debian.org
Subject: (fwd) Re: (fwd) Bug#195643: dependency on tetex-bin
Message-ID: <20030723183327.GE656@preusse-16223.user.cis.dfn.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
Organization: Hilmar Preusse Inc.
X-Uptime: 18:08:14 up 4 days, 6:07, 3 users, load average: 1.05, 1.03, 1.00
X-Operating-System: Linux 2.4.21 i686
X-www.distributed.net: OGR: 3 packets (699.39 stats units) [2.32 Mnodes/s]
X-Confirmation-Request: yes
X-Confirm-Reading-To: "Hilmar Preusse" <hille42@web.de>
Sender: hille42@web.de
Delivered-To: 195643-close@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.5 required=4.0
tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS,
MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,QUOTE_TWICE_1,
USER_AGENT_MUTT
version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_07_20
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_07_20 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp)
----- Forwarded message from Matthias Klose <doko@cs.tu-berlin.de> -----
From: Matthias Klose <doko@cs.tu-berlin.de>
To: Hilmar Preusse <hille42@web.de>
Subject: Re: (fwd) Bug#195643: dependency on tetex-bin
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 19:54:25 +0200
Message-ID: <16158.52177.265283.326834@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
X-Mailer: VM 7.03 under 21.4 (patch 6) "Common Lisp" XEmacs Lucid
References: <20030723123004.GE26061@preusse-16223.user.cis.dfn.de>
Hilmar Preusse writes:
Hi,
> Can we close that bug now? Would you be so kind as, if you think it
> can be closed?
yes, it seems, the versioning is decoupled now.
>
> Hilmar
> ----- Forwarded message from Frank Küster <frank@kuesterei.ch> -----
>
> From: frank@kuesterei.ch (Frank Küster)
> Reply-To: frank@kuesterei.ch (Frank Küster),
> 195643@bugs.debian.org
> To: 195643@bugs.debian.org
> Subject: Bug#195643: dependency on tetex-bin
> Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 14:38:17 +0200
> Message-ID: <[🔎] 87lluw9fie.fsf@alhambra.bioz.unibas.ch>
> References: <16089.42409.158935.653821@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
> <20030601.210507.41661477.kohda@pm.tokushima-u.ac.jp>
> <16089.61106.358407.160874@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
> User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux)
> X-Mailing-List: <debian-tetex-maint@lists.debian.org> archive/latest/4899
>
> Matthias Klose <doko@cs.tu-berlin.de> wrote:
>
> > Atsuhito Kohda writes:
> >
> >> Conflicts: texidoc, ..., tetex-bin (<= 2.0.2-3), xbase...
> >>
> >> This is necessary because handling of texmf.cnf, fmtutil.cnf,
> >> updmap.cfg was changed between 2.0.2-3 and 2.0.2-4 in both
> >> tetex-bin and tetex-base.
> >
> > if there is a reason, then it has to be as it is. but please don't
> > unnecessarily tighten the dependency for future uploads.
>
> So why hasn't this bug been closed?
>
> Thanks, Frank
--
sigmentation fault
Reply to: