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

Bug#760919: marked as done (RFA: ocfs2-tools -- tools for managing OCFS2 cluster filesystems)



Your message dated Fri, 10 Jun 2016 17:29:13 +0200
with message-id <20160610152913.GG2543@gavran.carpriv.carnet.hr>
and subject line Re: RFA: ocfs2-tools -- tools for managing OCFS2 cluster filesystems
has caused the Debian Bug report #760919,
regarding RFA: ocfs2-tools -- tools for managing OCFS2 cluster filesystems
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 this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
760919: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=760919
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: wnpp
Severity: normal

I request an adopter for the ocfs2-tools package as I no longer have access
to an OCFS2 setup.

The package description is:
 OCFS2 is a general purpose cluster filesystem. Unlike the initial release
 of OCFS, which supported only Oracle database workloads, OCFS2 provides
 full support as a general purpose filesystem.  OCFS2 is a complete rewrite
 of the previous version, designed to work as a seamless addition to the
 Linux kernel.
 .
 This package installs the tools to manage the OCFS2 filesystem, including mkfs,
 tunefs, fsck, debugfs, and the utilities to control the O2CB clustering stack.

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Package: ocfs2-tools
Version: 1.8.4-1

On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 09:58:41AM +0200, Valentin Vidic wrote:
> Great, thanks for the fast response :) 
> 
> I will work out the transfer details with Myon then.

New package version 1.8.4-1 has just been released.

-- 
Valentin

--- End Message ---

Reply to: