Package: scottfree
Version: 1.14-8
Severity: wishlist
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Usertags: nostrip
Hello,
There was a problem while autobuilding your package with
DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nostrip.
Final binaries are still stripped.
If you call dh_strip correctly in debian/rules, this may mean that upstre
Package: sdcc
Version: 2.6.0-5
Severity: wishlist
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Usertags: nostrip
Hello,
There was a problem while autobuilding your package with
DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nostrip.
Final binaries are still stripped.
If you call dh_strip correctly in debian/rules, this may mean that upstream
i
Package: sipp
Version: 3.1-11
Severity: wishlist
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Usertags: nostrip
Hello,
There was a problem while autobuilding your package with
DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nostrip.
Final binaries are still stripped.
If you call dh_strip correctly in debian/rules, this may mean that upstream
is
Package: smarteiffel
Version: 1.1-12
Severity: wishlist
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Usertags: nostrip
Hello,
There was a problem while autobuilding your package with
DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nostrip.
Final binaries are still stripped.
If you call dh_strip correctly in debian/rules, this may mean that upst
Package: skribe
Version: 1.2g-2
Severity: wishlist
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Usertags: nostrip
Hello,
There was a problem while autobuilding your package with
DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nostrip.
Final binaries are still stripped.
If you call dh_strip correctly in debian/rules, this may mean that upstream
Package: sound-recorder
Version: 0.06-7
Severity: wishlist
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Usertags: nostrip
Hello,
There was a problem while autobuilding your package with
DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nostrip.
Final binaries are still stripped.
If you call dh_strip correctly in debian/rules, this may mean that u
Rogério Brito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Theoretically (and practically also), an EOF should *never* be compared
> to a char: only to an int.
>
>> --- open21xx-0.7.5.orig/as21/cpp.c
>> +++ open21xx-0.7.5/as21/cpp.c
>> @@ -235,7 +235,7 @@
>> /* - 2 to leave room for testing comments and
open21xx_0.7.6-1_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
open21xx_0.7.6-1.dsc
open21xx_0.7.6.orig.tar.gz
open21xx_0.7.6-1.diff.gz
open21xx_0.7.6-1_i386.deb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a sub
Accepted:
open21xx_0.7.6-1.diff.gz
to pool/main/o/open21xx/open21xx_0.7.6-1.diff.gz
open21xx_0.7.6-1.dsc
to pool/main/o/open21xx/open21xx_0.7.6-1.dsc
open21xx_0.7.6-1_i386.deb
to pool/main/o/open21xx/open21xx_0.7.6-1_i386.deb
open21xx_0.7.6.orig.tar.gz
to pool/main/o/open21xx/open21xx_0.7.
On Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 01:43:04PM +0200, Matej Vela wrote:
> It seems we have a solution for the RC bug and some interest in
> keeping open21xx, so I'll let it be for a while.
If (as it seems) the package had never built on any of the affected
architectures then the bug shouldn't have been RC an
10 matches
Mail list logo