Michael Meskes wrote: > Decide what? Which software is broken? Or whether this is a bug?
to decide, if it is a bug in linux-modules-extra-2.6 or not. > Of course the reason matters, but the bug simply was about a binary > package not being available. no, read again. #441146 is about including some definition files into linux-modules-extra-2.6, not more, not less. as this was done, the bug is fixed. > IMO the only way to fix this is to deliver > the package. are you really not getting it? the /new/ problem is a problem in virtualbox-ose-source. it has absolutely nothing to do with linux-modules-extra-2.6. it can not be fixed in linux-modulex-extra-2.6. that is why it is not a bug in linux-modules-extra-2.6. > Fine with me. I don't mind having this bug reassigned. To be honest in > my opinion we should have two open bugs, one against > virtualbox-ose-source and one against linux-modules-extra-2.6 with the > latter one being blocked by the former. I still disagree with you guys > closing the bug though, though. no. the fact that virtualbox-ose-source does not comply with linux-modulex-extra-2.6 is a bug in virtualbox-ose-source, not in linux-modules-extra-2.6. > Just for the record we should note that this bug > had neither been reported against virtualbox-ose-source nor even > communicated with the package maintainers. theoretically, i communicated it to myself *scnr* :) -- Address: Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562 Biberist Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet: http://people.panthera-systems.net/~daniel-baumann/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
