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

Bug#199242: marked as done (O: camstream -- collection of tools for webcams and other video-devices)



Your message dated Sun, 29 Jun 2003 12:32:36 -0400
with message-id <E19Wf6S-0008WG-00@auric.debian.org>
and subject line Bug#199242: fixed in camstream 0.26.2-5
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; 29 Jun 2003 11:22:36 +0000
>From noel@debian.org Sun Jun 29 06:22:35 2003
Return-path: <noel@debian.org>
Received: from www.hostsharing.net (pima.hostsharing.net) [212.42.230.151] 
	by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 19WaGQ-0005jq-00; Sun, 29 Jun 2003 06:22:34 -0500
Received: from p4.domain.lan (p508EBB99.dip.t-dialin.net [80.142.187.153])
	(using SSLv3 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by pima.hostsharing.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 188E82CE99A
	for <submit@bugs.debian.org>; Sun, 29 Jun 2003 13:22:49 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: O: camstream -- collection of tools for webcams and other
	video-devices
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?No=E8l_K=F6the?= <noel@debian.org>
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-NkA6VlBVXe3OWQS1RTun"
Organization: Debian GNU/Linux, www.debian.org
Message-Id: <[🔎] 1056885957.1255.57.camel@p4.domain.lan>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.0 
Date: 29 Jun 2003 13:25:57 +0200
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-18.6 required=4.0
	tests=BAYES_01,HAS_PACKAGE,PGP_SIGNATURE_2,USER_AGENT_XIMIAN
	autolearn=ham version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_06_27
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_06_27 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp)


--=-NkA6VlBVXe3OWQS1RTun
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Package: wnpp
Severity: normal

orphaing this package because I don't use it regular anymore and want to
concentrate on some of my packages.

upstream is acive and the only open bug is that camstream is i386
specific.

--=20
No=C3=A8l K=C3=B6the <noel debian.org>
Debian GNU/Linux, www.debian.org

--=-NkA6VlBVXe3OWQS1RTun
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQA+/szF9/DnDzB9Vu0RAjZ5AJ9y0y4CIUjjxRCeM6cWtnUu2lF3mACcCscX
W8qJSrqWlCk3K3ALbj8wq1Q=
=R2Sb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-NkA6VlBVXe3OWQS1RTun--


---------------------------------------
Received: (at 199242-close) by bugs.debian.org; 29 Jun 2003 16:32:50 +0000
>From katie@auric.debian.org Sun Jun 29 11:32:50 2003
Return-path: <katie@auric.debian.org>
Received: from auric.debian.org [206.246.226.45] 
	by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 19Wf6g-0001pa-00; Sun, 29 Jun 2003 11:32:50 -0500
Received: from katie by auric.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 19Wf6S-0008WG-00; Sun, 29 Jun 2003 12:32:36 -0400
From: Aurelien Jarno <aurel32@debian.org>
To: 199242-close@bugs.debian.org
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.34 $
Subject: Bug#199242: fixed in camstream 0.26.2-5
Message-Id: <E19Wf6S-0008WG-00@auric.debian.org>
Sender: Archive Administrator <katie@auric.debian.org>
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 12:32:36 -0400
Delivered-To: 199242-close@bugs.debian.org

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
camstream, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

camstream_0.26.2-5.diff.gz
  to pool/main/c/camstream/camstream_0.26.2-5.diff.gz
camstream_0.26.2-5.dsc
  to pool/main/c/camstream/camstream_0.26.2-5.dsc
camstream_0.26.2-5_i386.deb
  to pool/main/c/camstream/camstream_0.26.2-5_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 199242@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Aurelien Jarno <aurel32@debian.org> (supplier of updated camstream 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-----
Hash: SHA1

Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 17:54:56 +0200
Source: camstream
Binary: camstream
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.26.2-5
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Aurelien Jarno <aurel32@debian.org>
Changed-By: Aurelien Jarno <aurel32@debian.org>
Description: 
 camstream  - collection of tools for webcams and other video-devices
Closes: 126972 199242
Changes: 
 camstream (0.26.2-5) unstable; urgency=low
 .
   * New maintainer (Thanks Noel :-) (closes: bug#199242).
   * Don't use MMX for color conversions so the package can run on all
     architectures. Moreover, a package for the i386 architecture should
     run on all x86 processors with x >= 3, not only on processors with
     MMX extension. (closes: bug#126972)
   * Added manpages for camstream, caminfo and ftpput.
Files: 
 45c865f0d19ea5386ee1d4a4d369d28b 644 misc optional camstream_0.26.2-5.dsc
 915f00a5dcff77559a541de870371b83 3663 misc optional camstream_0.26.2-5.diff.gz
 ec1855a371e99bba9980790c3aa37c33 1563534 misc optional camstream_0.26.2-5_i386.deb

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+/xFiw3ao2vG823MRAlWyAJ46oPffzjUASCybNAKOijEinGZEGgCdETyF
sgnf6BGPYJBnRe5pewVakRg=
=yzO1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Reply to: