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

Bug#541733: marked as done (xorg: Use dh_prep instead of previous “dh_clean -k”)

Your message dated Tue, 11 May 2010 15:38:01 +0200
with message-id <20100511133801.GA7650@radis.liafa.jussieu.fr>
and subject line Re: Bug#541733: xorg: Use dh_prep instead of previous “dh_clean -k”
has caused the Debian Bug report #541733,
regarding xorg: Use dh_prep instead of previous “dh_clean -k”
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.)


-- 
541733: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=541733
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Source: xorg
Source-Version: 1:7.4+4
Severity: minor
Tags: patch

Hi!

The use of the obsolete “dh_clean -k“ construct should be replaced by
dh_prep, and not by just removing the -k, attached patch fixes this.

regards,
guillem

diff --git a/debian/rules b/debian/rules
index 5c26be2..e0902f4 100755
--- a/debian/rules
+++ b/debian/rules
@@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ install-stamp: build-stamp
 	dh_testdir
 	dh_testroot
 	umask 022
-	dh_clean
+	dh_prep
 	chmod 755 debian/local/debian-setup-keyboard
 	touch $@

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Version: 1:7.5-1

On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 02:50:09 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:

> Source: xorg
> Source-Version: 1:7.4+4
> Severity: minor
> Tags: patch
> 
> Hi!
> 
> The use of the obsolete “dh_clean -k“ construct should be replaced by
> dh_prep, and not by just removing the -k, attached patch fixes this.
> 
Fixed a while ago.  Thanks for your report.

Cheers,
Julien

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


--- End Message ---
Reply to: