Bug#740120: marked as done (RFS: gambc/4.7.2-1 [ITA])

Your message dated Fri, 27 Jun 2014 04:24:04 + with message-id and subject line closing RFS: gambc/4.7.2-1 [ITA] has caused the Debian Bug report #740120, regarding RFS: gambc/4.7.2-1 [ITA] to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not th

Bug#752782: RFS: kvmcs-server_0.4.0 server part in kvm client server environment

Hi Willem, NB: I'm not a DD so cannot sponsor your package But a couple of points to consider... On 26/06/14 15:21, willem kuyn wrote: > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "kvmcs-server": > > * Package name: kvmcs-server >Version : 0.4.0 >Upstream Author : wille

Bug#752782: RFS: kvmcs-server_0.4.0 server part in kvm client server environment

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "kvmcs-server": * Package name: kvmcs-server Version : 0.4.0 Upstream Author : willem kuyn; willemk...@gmail.com * URL : * License : GPL-3+ Section

Bug#752520: RFS: lilyterm/0.9.9.4-1 [ITP]

On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 08:34:22PM +0200, Jakub Wilk wrote: > Aye, lilyterm-data is only 76K. Even when multiplied by 12 architectures, > that's still less than a megabyte. > > > And now for something completely different: > > You must not remove the alternative in "prerm upgrade". See bug #7162

Bug#747476: RFS: mcron/1.0.7-1

* Vincent Cheng , 2014-06-26, 01:06: - I'm not sure why you renamed debian/mcron.manpages -> debian/mcron.manpage, because the former is preferred according to dh_installman(1), although I guess it checks for either one AFAICT, it checks only for “manpages”. so the manpage still gets install

Bug#747476: marked as done (RFS: mcron/1.0.8-1)

Your message dated Thu, 26 Jun 2014 01:06:50 -0700 with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#747476: RFS: mcron/1.0.7-1 has caused the Debian Bug report #747476, regarding RFS: mcron/1.0.8-1 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the c

Bug#751666: marked as done (RFS: pentobi/8.0-2)

Your message dated Thu, 26 Jun 2014 00:00:20 -0700 with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#751665: RFS: pentobi/8.0-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #751665, regarding RFS: pentobi/8.0-2 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the c

Bug#751665: marked as done (RFS: pentobi/8.0-2)

Your message dated Thu, 26 Jun 2014 00:00:20 -0700 with message-id and subject line Re: Bug#751665: RFS: pentobi/8.0-2 has caused the Debian Bug report #751665, regarding RFS: pentobi/8.0-2 to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the c