Package: njplot
Version: 0.20041129-2
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1] http://l
Package: nawm
Version: 0.0.20030130-2
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1] http://l
Package: krusader
Version: 1.60.0-3
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1] http://lis
Package: ltris
Version: 1.0.10-1
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1] http://lists.
Package: noweb
Version: 2.10c-3.1
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1] http://lists
Package: libgdchart-gd1
Version: 0.10.1dev-10.1
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1
Package: mesa
Version: 6.3.2-2
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1] http://lists.de
Package: openbox
Version: 3.2-7
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1] http://lists.d
Package: nte
Version: 2.3-3.1
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1] http://lists.deb
Package: oneko
Version: 1.2.sakura.6-1
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1] http://
Package: mesa-legacy
Version: 6.2.1-8
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1] http://l
Package: libgpewidget
Version: 0.88-2
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1] http://l
Package: mlterm
Version: 2.9.2-5
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1] http://lists.
Package: lbreakout2
Version: 2.5.2-2
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1] http://li
Package: mgp
Version: 1.11b-5
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1] http://lists.deb
Package: nitpic
Version: 0.1-10
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1] http://lists.d
Package: libooc-x11
Version: 20020123-2
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1] http:/
Package: lxdoom
Version: 1.4.4-9.2
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1] http://list
Package: libgnome-gnorba-perl
Version: 0.1.0-2
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1]
Package: libggiwmh
Version: 0.1.0-1
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1] http://lis
Package: lsh-utils
Version: 2.0.1-5
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1] http://lis
Package: cthugha
Version: 1.4-4
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1] http://lists.d
Package: xpcd
Version: 2.08-11.1
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1] http://lists.
Package: xlbiff
Version: 4.1-1
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build from
source.
[1] http://lists.de
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 00:37 +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > qube:~# apt-get install ocaml
> > Reading Package Lists... Done
> > Building Dependency Tree... Done
> > The following packages have unmet dependencies:
> > ocaml: Depends: ocaml-nox-3.08.3
> > E: Broken packages
I get this from my mi
On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 02:38:03AM +0100, Adeodato Simó wrote:
>
> Finally, if there's a strong reason for which your package should not
> be NMUed, please note so in this bug report. Prospective NMUers will
> read your reasoning, and will decide if it's strong enough to delay
> their uplo
Adeodato Simó wrote:
> Finally, if there's a strong reason for which your package should
> not be NMUed, please note so in this bug report. Prospective NMUers
> will read your reasoning, and will decide if it's strong enough to
> delay their upload.
Will look at this, NMUs much wellcome!
Adeodato Simó wrote:
> Finally, if there's a strong reason for which your package should
> not be NMUed, please note so in this bug report. Prospective NMUers
> will read your reasoning, and will decide if it's strong enough to
> delay their upload.
Will look at this, NMUs much wellcome!
Your message dated Sun, 8 Jan 2006 20:36:19 -0600
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#346619: gretl: FTBFS: build-depends on removed xlibs-dev
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 no
Your message dated Sun, 8 Jan 2006 20:39:43 -0600
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#346683: gtkdevice: FTBFS: build-depends on removed
xlibs-dev
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
Your message dated Sun, 8 Jan 2006 20:40:32 -0600
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#346911: tkrplot: FTBFS: build-depends on removed xlibs-dev
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
Your message dated Sun, 08 Jan 2006 18:32:05 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#347028: fixed in ohphone 1:1.4.3+20050304-6
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 i
Your message dated Sun, 8 Jan 2006 20:42:42 -0600
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#347110: rgtk: FTBFS: build-depends on removed xlibs-dev
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
Your message dated Sun, 8 Jan 2006 20:41:16 -0600
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#347037: misc3d: FTBFS: build-depends on removed xlibs-dev
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 n
Your message dated Sun, 8 Jan 2006 19:01:22 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#346533: abiword is unistallable in testing
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
Your message dated Sun, 08 Jan 2006 18:47:09 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#346928: fixed in xiterm+thai 1.06.cvs20060109
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
Your message dated Sun, 08 Jan 2006 18:47:08 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#347023: fixed in ratpoison 1.3.0-8
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 message dated Sun, 08 Jan 2006 18:47:06 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#347107: fixed in ratmenu 2.3.6
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
On Mon, 09 Jan 2006, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> Finally, if there's a strong reason for which your package should not
> be NMUed, please note so in this bug report. Prospective NMUers will
> read your reasoning, and will decide if it's strong enough to delay
> their upload.
NMUs are welcome, i
Your message dated Sun, 8 Jan 2006 21:29:58 -0600
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#34: ggobi: FTBFS: build-depends on removed xlibs-dev
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 no
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Any news on this problem? Maybe we can help, can you give more details
on what you have so far?
Thanks!
- --
Denis Benoit
benoitde at s y m p a t i c o.ca
Most Open Source projects die, but when they do, it is a death Darwin
would understand. Every
Your message dated Sun, 8 Jan 2006 21:21:30 -0600
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#347086: rgl: FTBFS: build-depends on removed xlibs-dev
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
Denis Benoit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Any news on this problem? Maybe we can help, can you give more details
> on what you have so far?
I'm pretty much finished, but I'm waiting to hear back from the slib
maintainer about the location of guile.init.
--
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org an
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.10
> reopen 347086
Bug#347086: rgl: FTBFS: build-depends on removed xlibs-dev
Bug reopened, originator not changed.
> # please use version numbers when closing bugs!
> close 347086 0.65-
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.10
> # thanks for the quick patch
> tags 346843 patch
Bug#346843: xtoolwait: FTBFS: build-depends on removed xlibs-dev
There were no tags set.
Tags added: patch
>
End of message, stoppin
Your message dated Sun, 08 Jan 2006 19:32:05 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#346728: fixed in fkiss 0.33a.patch-4
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 no
Package: beep-media-player-dev
Version: 0.9.7.1+cvs20050803-1+b1
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package uninstallable.
[1] h
Your message dated Sun, 08 Jan 2006 19:32:11 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#346770: fixed in xdigger 1.0.10-9
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 y
Package: iconc
Version: 9.4.2-2.4
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package uninstallable.
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-d
Package: ivtools-dev
Version: 1.1.3-5
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package uninstallable.
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debi
Package: itk3.1-dev
Version: 3.1.0-7
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package uninstallable.
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debia
Package: itk3.0-dev
Version: 3.0.1-6
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package uninstallable.
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debia
Package: liblineak-dev
Version: 1:0.8.3-8
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package uninstallable.
[1] http://lists.debian.org/
Package: libdockapp-dev
Version: 1:0.5.0-1.1
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package uninstallable.
[1] http://lists.debian.o
Package: libooc-x11-dev
Version: 20020123-2
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package uninstallable.
[1] http://lists.debian.or
Package: libubit-dev
Version: 3.6.4-4
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package uninstallable.
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debi
Package: libvtk4-dev
Version: 4.4.2-8
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package uninstallable.
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debi
Package: libxine-dev
Version: 1.0.1-1.4
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package uninstallable.
[1] http://lists.debian.org/de
Package: tk8.0-dev
Version: 8.0.5-11
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package uninstallable.
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debia
Package: tk8.3-dev
Version: 8.3.5-5
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package uninstallable.
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian
Package: xviewg-dev
Version: 3.2p1.4-19.1
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package uninstallable.
[1] http://lists.debian.org/
Package: libmotif-dev
Version: 2.2.3-1.2
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes your package uninstallable.
[1] http://lists.debian.org/d
On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 02:39:02AM +0100, Adeodato Sim?? wrote:
Package: xtoolwait
Version: 1.3-5
Severity: serious
Hello,
This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
no longer available in sid. This makes
Adeodato Simó <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
> build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago,
> is no longer available in sid. This makes your package fail to build
> from source.
Oops! I thought I had checked all my
Your message dated Sun, 08 Jan 2006 19:47:06 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#346719: fixed in fnlib 0.5-13
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
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Hi Dirk. So that you know, it is now strongly deprecated to close bugs
> # without a version number nowadays that the BTS has versioning support;
> # unless they're bogus bugs, that is (which is not the case for the ones
> # below).
> # To close a bug
Your message dated Sun, 08 Jan 2006 20:02:17 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#346701: fixed in ecawave 1:0.6.1-7
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 message dated Sun, 08 Jan 2006 20:17:12 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#346830: fixed in xmms-status-plugin 1.0.0-3
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 i
Your message dated Sun, 08 Jan 2006 20:32:14 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#346843: fixed in xtoolwait 1.3-6
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 yo
Your message dated Sun, 08 Jan 2006 21:02:08 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#346835: fixed in xphoon 2613-10
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 message dated Sun, 08 Jan 2006 21:02:11 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#346867: fixed in xzoom 0.3-17
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
Your message dated Sun, 08 Jan 2006 21:47:06 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#347038: fixed in ripperx 2.6.7-2
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 yo
I have just made an NMU to fix this bug to the 1 day delayed queue (as
we are in permanent 0-day NMU until etch release). This NMU can be
overridden by a maintainer upload between now and then. The interdiff
of the upload is attached.
Don Armstrong
--
N: Why should I believe that?"
B: Because i
Your message dated Sun, 08 Jan 2006 22:17:27 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#336194: fixed in inetutils 2:1.4.3+20051212-1
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
Hi,
Mitsuka-san, could you prepare a fixed package? I'll sponsor you.
> Package: canna
> Version: 3.7p3-2
> Severity: serious
>
> Hello,
>
> This is a serious bug filed against your package because it
> build-depends on xlibs-dev, which as announced in [1] a while ago, is
> no longer ava
Your message dated Sun, 8 Jan 2006 22:58:36 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#346473: php5-clamavlib: not installable in sid
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
Your message dated Sun, 08 Jan 2006 22:47:08 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#346939: fixed in treetool 2.0.2a-4
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
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.10
> package clisp clisp-dev clisp-doc
Ignoring bugs not assigned to: clisp clisp-dev clisp-doc
> tags 346649 + pending
Bug#346649: clisp: FTBFS: build-depends on removed xlibs-dev
There
On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 06:45:55PM +0100, Helge Kreutzmann wrote:
> Hello Steve,
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 12:07:32AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Does this bug actually apply to unstable or testing, where we do have both
> > gtk+ 2.6 and libglade 2.5? Is anything required here other than a re
Your message dated Sun, 08 Jan 2006 23:17:08 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#347069: fixed in tipptrainer 0.6.0-7
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 no
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.10
> package clisp clisp-dev clisp-doc
Ignoring bugs not assigned to: clisp clisp-dev clisp-doc
> tags 346217 + pending
Bug#346217: clisp: FTBFS on ia64
There were no tags set.
Tags added
Package: gnome-menus
Version: 2.12.0-2
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
Hi,
When starting gmenu-simple-editor :
$ gmenu-simple-editor
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/gmenu-simple-editor", line 28, in ?
GMenuSimpleEditor.main.main (sys.argv[1:])
F
Your message dated Sun, 08 Jan 2006 23:32:34 -0800
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#346871: fixed in zvbi 0.2.17-5
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
601 - 683 of 683 matches
Mail list logo
