Bug#691169: not really fixed

2014-01-26 Thread intrigeri
Hi Daniel, Daniel Pocock wrote (22 Jan 2014 11:35:39 GMT) : > If you look closely, you'll see that the bug I reopened was 696011 and > this other bug was linked to it and Balint replied on this bug (691169) Ah, right, sorry I didn't look at the 4 bugs the one I've replied to is merged with. > Fo

Bug#691169: not really fixed

2014-01-22 Thread Daniel Pocock
On 22/01/14 12:19, intrigeri wrote: > Control: tag -1 + moreinfo > Control: tag -1 - experimental > > Hi, > > Balint Reczey wrote (29 Aug 2013 10:06:58 GMT) : >> Is current version in unstable still affected? If not, please mark the >> bug accordingly since this open RC bug would prevent migration

Bug#691169: not really fixed

2014-01-22 Thread intrigeri
Control: tag -1 + moreinfo Control: tag -1 - experimental Hi, Balint Reczey wrote (29 Aug 2013 10:06:58 GMT) : > Is current version in unstable still affected? If not, please mark the > bug accordingly since this open RC bug would prevent migration to testing. > I'm decreasing severity since newe

Bug#691169: not really fixed

2013-08-29 Thread Balint Reczey
severity 691169 important thanks Hi Daniel, Is current version in unstable still affected? If not, please mark the bug accordingly since this open RC bug would prevent migration to testing. I'm decreasing severity since newer VirtualBox packages build fine with kernels packaged in Debian. What do