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

[Pkg-xfce-devel] Bug#316429: marked as done (xfce4-panel: depending on Essential packages)



Your message dated Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:53:10 +0100
with message-id <20050630225310.GC16509@paranoidfreak.co.uk>
and subject line [Pkg-xfce-devel] Bug#316429: xfce4-panel: depending on Essential packages
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; 30 Jun 2005 21:14:14 +0000
>From jidanni@jidanni.org Thu Jun 30 14:14:14 2005
Return-path: <jidanni@jidanni.org>
Received: from frodo.hserus.net [204.74.68.40] 
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1Do6MQ-00058R-00; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 14:14:14 -0700
Received: from tc218-187-20-133.dialup.dynamic.apol.com.tw ([218.187.20.133]:32786 helo=jidanni1)
	by frodo.hserus.net with esmtpsa 
	(Cipher TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.51 #0)
	id 1Do6MO-000M4S-Nq by authid <jidanni> with plain
	for <submit@bugs.debian.org>; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 02:44:13 +0530
X-Debbugs-No-Ack: please
Subject: xfce4-panel: depending on Essential packages
To: <submit@bugs.debian.org>
X-Mailer: mail (GNU Mailutils 0.6.90)
Message-Id: <[🔎] E1Do5f5-0001CN-QR@jidanni1>
From: Dan Jacobson <jidanni@jidanni.org>
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 04:29:27 +0800
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
	(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_NO_ACK autolearn=ham version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level: 

Package: xfce4-panel
Severity: wishlist

xfce4-panel should not depend on debianutils, as per policy 3.5, I guess.

---------------------------------------
Received: (at 316429-close) by bugs.debian.org; 30 Jun 2005 22:53:19 +0000
>From huggie@earth.li Thu Jun 30 15:53:19 2005
Return-path: <huggie@earth.li>
Received: from the.earth.li [193.201.200.66] 
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1Do7uJ-0007XL-00; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 15:53:19 -0700
Received: from huggie by the.earth.li with local (Exim 4.50)
	id 1Do7uA-0000hV-U5; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:53:10 +0100
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:53:10 +0100
From: Simon Huggins <huggie@earth.li>
To: Dan Jacobson <jidanni@jidanni.org>, 316429-close@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Bug#316429: xfce4-panel: depending on Essential packages
Message-ID: <20050630225310.GC16509@paranoidfreak.co.uk>
References: <[🔎] E1Do5f5-0001CN-QR@jidanni1>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <[🔎] E1Do5f5-0001CN-QR@jidanni1>
Organization: Black Cat Networks, http://www.blackcatnetworks.co.uk/
X-Attribution: huggie
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
Delivered-To: 316429-close@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
	(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_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level: 

On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 04:29:27AM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote:
> Package: xfce4-panel
> Severity: wishlist

> xfce4-panel should not depend on debianutils, as per policy 3.5, I guess.

This has been fixed in unstable since June 18th.

Simon.

-- 
Just another wannabie |    "Somebody's poisoned the    |  Just another fool
----------------------+          waterhole!"           +-------------------
This message was brought to you by the letter V and the number 12.
htag.pl 0.0.22 -- http://www.earth.li/projectpurple/progs/htag.html



Reply to: