arne anka wrote:
> here's a really trivial fix to a rather serious problem -- which could
> have been solved immediately after this report came in, over a month ago
>
> Kernel: Linux 2.6.37.1 (SMP w/2 CPU cores; PREEMPT)
Oh right. If you think the fix is to go back to using GROUP= in the u
"arne anka" wrote:
> would you care to explain, what exactly in the report as bogus and
> what would justify a bug report for you (describing a real problem and
> including a fix is apparently not sufficient) instead of a snotty
> reply?
It's all in the bug log - read it.
Show me there is an is
The report was bogus and there is no issue.
the report was corect and fully justified. furthermore, the proposed patch
did fix it.
i spend a long time searching for a solution to exactly that issue today
and was happy to hit the report and the patch.
would you care to explain, what exactly
arne anka wrote:
Hi,
> may i bring this report to your attention again?
> imo the severity should be higher than normal and this report should be
> dealt with as soon as possible.
The report was bogus and there is no issue.
JB.
--
Julien BLACHE - Debian & GNU/Linux Developer -
Public
Package: libsane
Version: 1.0.22-2
Followup-For: Bug #623119
may i bring this report to your attention again?
imo the severity should be higher than normal and this report should be
dealt with as soon as possible.
here's a really trivial fix to a rather serious problem -- which could
have been s
5 matches
Mail list logo
