On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 08:49:50AM +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Anthony Towns [2004-03-16 13:51]:
> > > > But it is difficult for me(currently) to maintain two versions of
> > > > mozilla.
> > > > So, I'll orphan it...
> > > Is anyone interested in maintaining a mozilla-snapshot package in
>
Hi,
I'm trying to rebuild xirssi with the maintainer set to the QA group, but
it's not playing ball.
Essential part of the build failure is:
gcc-3.2 -O2 -g -Wall -o xirssi dialog-about.o gui.o gui-channel.o
gui-colors.o gui-context-nick.o gui-context-url.o gui-entry.o gui-frame.o
gui-itemlist.o
On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 07:33:22AM +1100, Rob Weir wrote:
> 229931: elisp-manual-ja needs to Build-Dep on emacs21, not emacs20.
> Reported two months ago, explicit (trivial) patch has been
> sitting there for two weeks.
This one kind of worried me; the manual seems to be for emacs2
Just trawling through the BugScan output, I found a few easy-to-fix RC bugs that
have had patches sitting around for a while. So, here goes:
233145: docbook-slides is missing a Build-Dep on xml-core. Open for a
month, planned NMU last week did not eventuate.
232215: docbook-simple needs
On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 01:41:02PM +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-03-16 14:14]:
> > 1) revive the claims.cgi page. This would probably require syncing
> > a file from a nonrestricted host to spohr. (Or perhaps
>
> Yeah, can you talk to AJ?
Will try
* Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-03-16 14:14]:
> 1) revive the claims.cgi page. This would probably require syncing
> a file from a nonrestricted host to spohr. (Or perhaps
Yeah, can you talk to AJ?
--
Martin Michlmayr
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Frank Lichtenheld ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040316 14:25]:
> As noted in the announcement there is currently no central BSP
> coordination page for bug squashing parties. Currently I see
> two ways to implement one again:
>
> 1) revive the claims.cgi page. This would probably require syncing
> a file
Hi.
As noted in the announcement there is currently no central BSP
coordination page for bug squashing parties. Currently I see
two ways to implement one again:
1) revive the claims.cgi page. This would probably require syncing
a file from a nonrestricted host to spohr. (Or perhaps
setting up the
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 08:02:47PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> So, http://bugs.debian.org/release-critical/other/all.html
> and http://packages.qa.debian.org/
> and http://bts.turmzimmer.net/
> all show packages as being in 'testing' which aren't, because they were
> removed on the last run.
>
Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> So, http://bugs.debian.org/release-critical/other/all.html
> and http://packages.qa.debian.org/
> and http://bts.turmzimmer.net/
> all show packages as being in 'testing' which aren't, because they were
> removed on the last run.
>
> Perhaps there's some way to schedule t
On 2004-03-16 Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 03:42:25PM +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
[...]
> > Is anyone interested in maintaining a mozilla-snapshot package in
> > experimental?
> Err, presumably it should just be called "mozilla" in that case?
I think mozilla-snapshot and moz
reassign 230968 ftp.debian.org
retitle 230968 Please remove cl-uncommonsql
thanks
* Andrew Pollock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-03-16 18:32]:
> Release critical bug #217709 > 141 days old
> Dead upstream (according to #217709)
> Orphaned
Yeah.
The previous maintainers writes in #217709, "If these p
* Anthony Towns [2004-03-16 13:51]:
> > > But it is difficult for me(currently) to maintain two versions of
> > > mozilla.
> > > So, I'll orphan it...
> > Is anyone interested in maintaining a mozilla-snapshot package in
> > experimental?
>
> Err, presumably it should just be called "mozilla" in
Release critical bug #217709 > 141 days old
Dead upstream (according to #217709)
Orphaned
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 03:42:25PM +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> > > I agree it sohuld probably be removed and a mozilla CVS or
> > > mozilla-snapshot package uploaded to experimental.
> > I think so too. it should be moved to experimental.
> > But it is difficult for me(currently) to maintain t
Hi,
sorry, it took me quite a while to get a new package of qps (yes,
quite a _lot_ of time), but yesterday evening I uploaded a
qt2-version of qps. With some luck I will be able to upload tonight
a package with qt3-support.
Ciao, Hanno (if you want to respond, please put me in copy since I
do no
16 matches
Mail list logo