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

Re: xsesssion-errors



On Sun, Sep 02, 2012 at 03:07:09PM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Camaleón wrote:
> > Bob Proulx wrote:
> > > Camaleón wrote:
> > >> But it seems the problem remains (read comment #45) so dunno why it was
> > >> archived with apparently no additional clues on the current status:
> > > 
> > > This was the message that closed it. It was sent to 617940-done and so
> > > the bug was marked as closed.  The other bug was forcibly merged with
> > > this one and so it was closed too.
> > > 
> > >   http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=617940#26
> > 
> > Yes, but regardless the bug status (closed or archived) the issue 
> > persists as reported later:
> > 
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=33;bug=617940
> > 
> > Or is that I am wrongly reading the "notfixed 617940 2:1.0~rc3+svn20090426-2" tag?
> 
> What I see by looking now is:
> 
>   * 617940 is/was assigned to the libvdpau1 package
>   * notfixed 617940 2:1.0~rc3+svn20090426-2 removes any indication that
>     version 2:1.0~rc3+svn20090426-2 was fixed.
>   * libvdpau1 never had any version 2:1.0~rc3+svn20090426-2 in the
>     archive according to http://packages.qa.debian.org/libv/libvdpau.html 
>     and therefore marking it as not fixed does not mark any existing
>     version as buggy.  The version number is just completely bogus.
> 
> I think 2:1.0~rc3+svn20090426-2 was meant to apply to mplayer not
> libvdpau1 and therefore the intended bug maintenance actions did not
> occur as intended.  The bug remained closed and was archived according
> to the standard schedule for closed bugs.
> 
> Bob

So what now?



-- 
"If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people
who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the 
oppressing." --- Malcolm X


Reply to: