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

Bug#255716: marked as done (ITP: libpmount -- Portable mount library)



Your message dated Mon, 05 Jul 2004 00:48:50 -0400
with message-id <E1BhLPO-0006th-00@newraff.debian.org>
and subject line Bug#255716: fixed in libpmount 0.0.1
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; 22 Jun 2004 16:01:47 +0000
>From rmh@khazad.dyndns.org Tue Jun 22 09:01:46 2004
Return-path: <rmh@khazad.dyndns.org>
Received: from 86.red-80-24-13.pooles.rima-tde.net (khazad.dyndns.org) [80.24.13.86] 
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1BcniU-0000vC-00; Tue, 22 Jun 2004 09:01:46 -0700
Received: from rmh by khazad.dyndns.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
	id 1BcmZG-0001Bo-00; Tue, 22 Jun 2004 16:48:10 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Robert Millan <rmh@debian.org>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: ITP: libpmount -- Portable mount library
X-Mailer: reportbug 2.61
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 16:48:10 +0200
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Message-Id: <E1BcmZG-0001Bo-00@khazad.dyndns.org>
Sender: <rmh@khazad.dyndns.org>
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-11.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE,
	X_DEBBUGS_CC autolearn=ham version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level: 

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist

* Package name    : libpmount
  Version         : 0.0.1
  Upstream Author : Myself.
* License         : LGPL
  Description     : Portable mount library

This library implements functions pmount() and pumount() as wrappers to the
real mount/umount2/unmount/whatever unportable interfaces on each platform.

Its goal is to provide a consistent interface application programmers can
rely on for mounting and umounting filesystems without having to address
kernel-related portability problems.

Preliminar work in http://people.debian.org/~rmh/pmount/

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.4.26-1-k7
Locale: LANG=ca_ES@euro, LC_CTYPE=ca_ES@euro (ignored: LC_ALL set to C)

---------------------------------------
Received: (at 255716-close) by bugs.debian.org; 5 Jul 2004 04:50:20 +0000
>From rdonald@newraff.debian.org Sun Jul 04 21:50:20 2004
Return-path: <rdonald@newraff.debian.org>
Received: from newraff.debian.org [208.185.25.31] (mail)
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1BhLQq-0003Lj-00; Sun, 04 Jul 2004 21:50:20 -0700
Received: from rdonald by newraff.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1BhLPO-0006th-00; Mon, 05 Jul 2004 00:48:50 -0400
From: Robert Millan <rmh@debian.org>
To: 255716-close@bugs.debian.org
X-Katie: lisa $Revision: 1.30 $
Subject: Bug#255716: fixed in libpmount 0.0.1
Message-Id: <E1BhLPO-0006th-00@newraff.debian.org>
Sender: Randall Donald <rdonald@newraff.debian.org>
Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2004 00:48:50 -0400
Delivered-To: 255716-close@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER 
	autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level: 

Source: libpmount
Source-Version: 0.0.1

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

libpmount-dev_0.0.1_i386.deb
  to pool/main/libp/libpmount/libpmount-dev_0.0.1_i386.deb
libpmount0.0_0.0.1_i386.deb
  to pool/main/libp/libpmount/libpmount0.0_0.0.1_i386.deb
libpmount_0.0.1.dsc
  to pool/main/libp/libpmount/libpmount_0.0.1.dsc
libpmount_0.0.1.tar.gz
  to pool/main/libp/libpmount/libpmount_0.0.1.tar.gz



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 255716@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Robert Millan <rmh@debian.org> (supplier of updated libpmount 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: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 14:15:24 +0200
Source: libpmount
Binary: libpmount0.0 libpmount-dev
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.0.1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Robert Millan <rmh@debian.org>
Changed-By: Robert Millan <rmh@debian.org>
Description: 
 libpmount-dev - Portable mount library, development files
 libpmount0.0 - Portable mount library, shared object
Closes: 255716
Changes: 
 libpmount (0.0.1) unstable; urgency=low
 .
   * Initial Release. (Closes: #255716)
Files: 
 e94305ce39dc3907774a93c09da28f56 536 libs optional libpmount_0.0.1.dsc
 fadd05e4acb4160804acb650fcbb864c 8854 libs optional libpmount_0.0.1.tar.gz
 71f6bb9de1e606c2ec3f20a48fcfd877 2834 libdevel optional libpmount-dev_0.0.1_i386.deb
 5c5c0cd9ce5410a868f7f6be8d9a37b2 3410 libs optional libpmount0.0_0.0.1_i386.deb

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA2mwUC19io6rUCv8RAlwGAJ9qh0BMjHXBeNwy6jHk8zedlVGFcwCfXAvl
GF6w8pbeyJto3Z590Pz9NeU=
=Z/Qt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Reply to: