Package: ftp.debian.org
Severity: normal
On Fri, Aug 11, 2006, Michael Ablassmeier wrote:
> hi Moritz,
>
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 07:12:26PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> > I'd like to suggest to remove libjpeg-mmx, it adds libjpeg code duplication
> > requiring duplicate DSAs for libjpeg
hi Moritz,
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 07:12:26PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> I'd like to suggest to remove libjpeg-mmx, it adds libjpeg code duplication
> requiring duplicate DSAs for libjpeg security problems, only provides static
> libs, is dead upstream, RC buggy and according to Google th
Your message dated Fri, 11 Aug 2006 12:11:48 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#382420: amd64 not yet, or is it?
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
user [EMAIL PROTECTED]
usertags 381267 + ddpo
thanks
Re: Lionel Elie Mamane 2006-08-03 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=lmamane&comaint=yes says I've
> NMUed thinkpad, while what I've done is sponsor an NMU by
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Similarly, I have not QA-uploaded
Re: Thomas Viehmann 2006-07-30 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> could packages (co-) maintained with uids on the key in the Debian
> keyring be shown as such (e.g. my Debian account is tviehmann but I use
> my regular mail address for uploads, so q.d.o/d?login=tviehmann looks
> "wrong")?
Once someone writes
Re: Martin Michlmayr 2006-08-04 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > This is something completely different from requesting help with a
> > specific bug. IMO the wnpp page should remain package oriented and
> > restricted to real wnpp bugs.
True, but a pointer doesn't hurt.
> > I think your suggestion to ad
6 matches
Mail list logo
