Quoting Justin Pryzby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi,
>
> Stephen Stafford maintains apt-spy, which has RC bug #315120:
> "apt-spy: segfault with updated mirror list", for which I have a
> patch.
>
> Last we knew, he was moving to London and hoped s
lin Watson tried it and it refused to
build on PowerPC.
I appreciate any time that anyone is able to give to this issue.
Thanks,
Stephen
--
Stephen Stafford | Development and support consultant
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://www.clothcat.org
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Adeodato Simó wrote:
> There was a little discussion about distributed-net-pproxy last month:
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-qa/2004/07/msg00040.html
>
> To make it easier to sbd. reading the removal bug (CCed), e.g. a
> ftpmaster, this is the link for this second thread:
>
> ht
Quoting Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> * Stephen Stafford ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040709 21:10]:
> > I've done some work on the distributed-net client package (trying to make
> it fit
> > for release) and came across distributed-net-pproxy while I was at it.
>
C bug - #145410 - (with a patch) for
well over 2 years which nobody has cared enough to fix, is non-free, and doesn't
function with the current distributed.net infrastructure (needs update to latest
upstream version) - see #181473.
I think we should remove it from the archive.
Cheers,
ghts? Should I remove it from the
package? What's the process in that case? Do I need to file a bug against
ftp.d.o asking for the m68k package to be removed?
Cheers,
Stephen
[1] http://www.clothcat.org/scratch/debian/
--
Stephen Stafford | Development and support consult
t about epic4
scripting...as it stands there's a fair bit of work required to make it work
again properly. It's close to needing a rewrite from scratch.
--
Stephen Stafford
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
inish the
packaging), but due to an indemnity clause in the license it cannot be
packaged (I removed my ITP bugs, didn't know this was still there). I
suggest that it be tagged wontfix as per someone's suggestion, and listed on
the software that can't be packaged list.
Cheers,
Stephen Stafford
it only exists in potato. I can't see why/when it
was removed from unstable though. It doesn't seem to be listed in the
removed list. Perhaps somebody can remember?
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ madison wily
wily | 0.13.41-0.2 |stable | source, alpha, arm, i386,
m68k, powerpc,
> Documentation License version 1.1. A detached signature for the new
> version is included.
>
> Stephen Stafford will be the new maintainer of the package (upstream
> and Debian package) soon and can close this bug when he makes his
> first upload. :) (We agreed on my notifying ab
10 matches
Mail list logo
