Bug#321406: marked as done (evince: libdjvulibre dependency problem)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320582: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320621: marked as done (libdjvulibre1 3.5.14-6 changes soname without warning)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321406: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321652: marked as done (evince: Evince shared library problem)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320582: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#322600: marked as done (evince: Application will not start)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320582: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321406: marked as done (evince: libdjvulibre dependency problem)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321406: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321509: marked as done (evince is linked against libdjvulibre.so.14 when libdjvulibre1 provides libdjvulibre.so.15)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320656: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#322600: marked as done (evince: Application will not start)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321509: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#322882: marked as done (Error while loading shared libraries: libdjvulibre.so.14)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:12 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#322600: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#322600: marked as done (evince: Application will not start)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321244: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320794: marked as done (evince: Evince missing library libdjvulibre.so)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321509: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320656: marked as done (evince: libdjvulibre.so.14 has gone)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320582: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320582: marked as done (libdjvulibre1: soname of library changed)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320582: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321406: marked as done (evince: libdjvulibre dependency problem)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321244: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321244: marked as done (evince does not start, missing dependency on libdjvulibre1.so.14)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:12 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#322600: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320794: marked as done (evince: Evince missing library libdjvulibre.so)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:12 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#322882: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#322600: marked as done (evince: Application will not start)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321406: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320582: marked as done (libdjvulibre1: soname of library changed)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320621: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320621: marked as done (libdjvulibre1 3.5.14-6 changes soname without warning)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320621: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321244: marked as done (evince does not start, missing dependency on libdjvulibre1.so.14)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321406: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321406: marked as done (evince: libdjvulibre dependency problem)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320656: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321406: marked as done (evince: libdjvulibre dependency problem)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:12 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#322882: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321244: marked as done (evince does not start, missing dependency on libdjvulibre1.so.14)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320621: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320794: marked as done (evince: Evince missing library libdjvulibre.so)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320582: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#322882: marked as done (Error while loading shared libraries: libdjvulibre.so.14)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321244: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320794: marked as done (evince: Evince missing library libdjvulibre.so)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321652: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321406: marked as done (evince: libdjvulibre dependency problem)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320794: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320621: marked as done (libdjvulibre1 3.5.14-6 changes soname without warning)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:12 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#322882: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#322882: marked as done (Error while loading shared libraries: libdjvulibre.so.14)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320582: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320794: marked as done (evince: Evince missing library libdjvulibre.so)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321406: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#322882: marked as done (Error while loading shared libraries: libdjvulibre.so.14)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320621: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320656: marked as done (evince: libdjvulibre.so.14 has gone)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321406: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321652: marked as done (evince: Evince shared library problem)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320656: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#322600: marked as done (evince: Application will not start)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:12 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#322600: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321652: marked as done (evince: Evince shared library problem)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:12 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#322600: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#369523: FTBFS: 'quicktime_set_window' was not declared in this scope'

Hello Martin, On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 02:48:13PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > xmovie now fails to build on unstable: > Helge, maybe you have some idea how to fix this? No, sorry. Besides I am not involved in xmovie (I only wanted in on alpha a few years ago and even got it working, but the

Bug#320794: marked as done (evince: Evince missing library libdjvulibre.so)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:12 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#322600: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Processed: again

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tags 369513 + unreproducible Bug#369513: gnucash: does not start Tags were: moreinfo Tags added: unreproducible > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debi

Bug#320794: marked as done (evince: Evince missing library libdjvulibre.so)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321244: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321244: marked as done (evince does not start, missing dependency on libdjvulibre1.so.14)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321509: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320582: marked as done (libdjvulibre1: soname of library changed)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:12 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#322600: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321244: marked as done (evince does not start, missing dependency on libdjvulibre1.so.14)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321244: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320794: marked as done (evince: Evince missing library libdjvulibre.so)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320621: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#322882: marked as done (Error while loading shared libraries: libdjvulibre.so.14)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321406: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321652: marked as done (evince: Evince shared library problem)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321244: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321509: marked as done (evince is linked against libdjvulibre.so.14 when libdjvulibre1 provides libdjvulibre.so.15)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:12 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#322600: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320621: marked as done (libdjvulibre1 3.5.14-6 changes soname without warning)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321652: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320656: marked as done (evince: libdjvulibre.so.14 has gone)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320794: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321509: marked as done (evince is linked against libdjvulibre.so.14 when libdjvulibre1 provides libdjvulibre.so.15)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321652: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#322600: marked as done (evince: Application will not start)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320656: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#322882: marked as done (Error while loading shared libraries: libdjvulibre.so.14)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321509: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321652: marked as done (evince: Evince shared library problem)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320794: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321406: marked as done (evince: libdjvulibre dependency problem)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321652: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321406: marked as done (evince: libdjvulibre dependency problem)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321509: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320621: marked as done (libdjvulibre1 3.5.14-6 changes soname without warning)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320656: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#322882: marked as done (Error while loading shared libraries: libdjvulibre.so.14)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320794: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320656: marked as done (evince: libdjvulibre.so.14 has gone)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320621: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321244: marked as done (evince does not start, missing dependency on libdjvulibre1.so.14)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:12 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#322882: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320794: marked as done (evince: Evince missing library libdjvulibre.so)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320656: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321244: marked as done (evince does not start, missing dependency on libdjvulibre1.so.14)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320794: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320656: marked as done (evince: libdjvulibre.so.14 has gone)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321652: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320582: marked as done (libdjvulibre1: soname of library changed)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321244: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320621: marked as done (libdjvulibre1 3.5.14-6 changes soname without warning)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:12 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#322600: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321509: marked as done (evince is linked against libdjvulibre.so.14 when libdjvulibre1 provides libdjvulibre.so.15)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320621: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320582: marked as done (libdjvulibre1: soname of library changed)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321509: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320621: marked as done (libdjvulibre1 3.5.14-6 changes soname without warning)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321244: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320621: marked as done (libdjvulibre1 3.5.14-6 changes soname without warning)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320794: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320794: marked as done (evince: Evince missing library libdjvulibre.so)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320794: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321652: marked as done (evince: Evince shared library problem)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:12 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#322882: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320621: marked as done (libdjvulibre1 3.5.14-6 changes soname without warning)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321509: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321509: marked as done (evince is linked against libdjvulibre.so.14 when libdjvulibre1 provides libdjvulibre.so.15)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320794: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321244: marked as done (evince does not start, missing dependency on libdjvulibre1.so.14)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321652: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321509: marked as done (evince is linked against libdjvulibre.so.14 when libdjvulibre1 provides libdjvulibre.so.15)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321406: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320656: marked as done (evince: libdjvulibre.so.14 has gone)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320656: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321107: marked as done (djvulibre_3.5.14-6(m68k/unstable/poseidon): FTBFS on m68k)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321107: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321244: marked as done (evince does not start, missing dependency on libdjvulibre1.so.14)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#320656: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#321652: marked as done (evince: Evince shared library problem)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321509: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Bug#320656: marked as done (evince: libdjvulibre.so.14 has gone)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 09:17:11 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#321509: fixed in djvulibre 3.5.17-1 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 it is now

Processed: tagging 368937, merging 368937 368544

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tags 368937 + experimental Bug#368937: linux-headers-2.6.17-rc3-686: fails to install There were no tags set. Tags added: experimental > merge 368937 368544 Bug#368544: linux-headers-2.6.17-rc3-amd64-k8: depends on non-existant package linux-kbuild-2.

Bug#369513: gnucash: does not start

tags 369513 - unreproducible, moreinfo severity 369513 minor title 369513 gnucash: remembers even impossible window positions thanks Alberto Maurizi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > OK, following your suggestions I managed to "solve" de bug. > I try to explain the problem because it can

Processed: Re: Bug#369513: gnucash: does not start

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tags 369513 - unreproducible, moreinfo Bug#369513: gnucash: does not start Tags were: unreproducible moreinfo Tags removed: unreproducible, moreinfo > severity 369513 minor Bug#369513: gnucash: does not start Severity set to `minor' from `grave' > tit

Bug#361541: [Pkg-utopia-maintainers] Bug#361541: monodoc-dbus-1-manual: package empty

On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 02:26:59PM +0200, Pierre HABOUZIT wrote: > > Hello, > > > > according to the description "This packages contains the compiled XML > > documentation for the D-BUS CLI bindings". Unfortunately it doesn't > > contain anything useful, only[1]: > > actually, those docs do not

Bug#361230: marked as done (etherboot: FTBFS: Mtools version detection problem/Wrong Build-Depends on amd64)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 10:02:21 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#361230: fixed in etherboot 5.4.2-1 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 it is now

Bug#361230: marked as done (etherboot: FTBFS: Mtools version detection problem/Wrong Build-Depends on amd64)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 10:02:21 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#358124: fixed in etherboot 5.4.2-1 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 it is now

Bug#361541: [Pkg-utopia-maintainers] Bug#361541: monodoc-dbus-1-manual: package empty

Le Mar 30 Mai 2006 18:53, Sjoerd Simons a écrit : > On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 02:26:59PM +0200, Pierre HABOUZIT wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > according to the description "This packages contains the compiled > > > XML documentation for the D-BUS CLI bindings". Unfortunately it > > > doesn't contain

Bug#358124: marked as done (etherboot: FTBFS: newer mtools version not recognized)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 10:02:21 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#361230: fixed in etherboot 5.4.2-1 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 it is now

Bug#358124: marked as done (etherboot: FTBFS: newer mtools version not recognized)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 10:02:21 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#358124: fixed in etherboot 5.4.2-1 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 it is now

Bug#365533: [Secure-testing-team] Re: Bug#365533: CVE-2006-1896: Admin command execution

On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 09:55:16AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: > On Sun, 2006-05-28 at 22:11 +0100, Steve Kemp wrote: > > Uploaded. > > Thanks! But... can't find the upload anywhere? Maybe something went > wrong or am I looking the wrong way? I got a 'upload removed due to not being signed by

Bug#365533: [Secure-testing-team] Re: Bug#365533: CVE-2006-1896: Admin command execution

On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 07:14:11PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 09:55:16AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: > > On Sun, 2006-05-28 at 22:11 +0100, Steve Kemp wrote: > > > Uploaded. > > > > Thanks! But... can't find the upload anywhere? Maybe something went > > wrong

Processed: Re: Bug#369523: FTBFS: 'quicktime_set_window' was not declared in this scope'

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tags 369523 + patch Bug#369523: FTBFS: 'quicktime_set_window' was not declared in this scope' There were no tags set. Tags added: patch > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administra

Bug#369523: FTBFS: 'quicktime_set_window' was not declared in this scope'

tags 369523 + patch thanks Hello Martin, On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 02:48:13PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > Package: xmovie > Version: 1.9.12-1 > Severity: serious > > xmovie now fails to build on unstable: > Helge, maybe you have some idea how to fix this? Ok, I do. A while ago I tried build

Bug#345891: marked as done (needs update for new archive key)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 13:38:13 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line closing this bug 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

Bug#340538: followup on this bug?

This RC bug has been open since November with no maintainer followup that I can see. Is anything being done to remove the problimatic files and/or get them properly licensed upstream? -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Bug#328188: license bug open for 8 months w/o reply

This licencing bug has been open for 8 months now w/o a maintainer reply. Should it be reassigned to ftp.debian.org to get this package removed from Debian? -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Bug#369493: guile-1.6 - FTBFS: The Debian autofiles patch is not available.

Bastian Blank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Package: guile-1.6 > Version: 1.6.8-1 > Severity: serious > > There was an error while trying to autobuild your package: Thanks. I've fixed this problem, but now there's a different problem, though only on ia64. So far, I don't know what's causing tha

Processed: tagging 369491

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.20 > tags 369491 fixed Bug#369491: parted - FTBFS: Error 1 There were no tags set. Tags added: fixed > End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance.

Bug#345823: marked as done (apt: Key error at year turnover resembles security problem, and may represent one)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 13:38:13 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line closing this bug 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

Bug#365147: marked as done (xbubble: FTBFS with new X packages: Bad link line)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 10:32:24 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#365147: fixed in xbubble 0.5.11.2-1 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 it is now

Bug#365533: marked as done (CVE-2006-1896: Admin command execution)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 10:32:19 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#365533: fixed in phpbb2 2.0.18-3 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 it is now yo

Bug#346002: marked as done (apt: GPG error when updating)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 13:38:13 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line closing this bug 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

Bug#345956: marked as done (misleading apt-get warning message from apt-key)

Your message dated Tue, 30 May 2006 13:38:13 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line closing this bug 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

<    1   2   3   >