Your message dated Wed, 21 Sep 2005 23:02:05 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#329486: fixed in rmpi 0.4.9-2
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 your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 22 Sep 2005 04:27:05 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Sep 21 21:27:04 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from smtp3.stanford.edu [171.67.16.138] 
        by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
        id 1EIIfo-0002Iw-00; Wed, 21 Sep 2005 21:27:04 -0700
Received: from windlord.stanford.edu (windlord.Stanford.EDU [171.64.19.147])
        by smtp3.Stanford.EDU (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j8M4R2j6007031
        for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 21 Sep 2005 21:27:02 -0700
Received: by windlord.stanford.edu (Postfix, from userid 1000)
        id 44C07E7DDB; Wed, 21 Sep 2005 21:27:02 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: rmpi: needs rebuild for lam transition
X-Mailer: reportbug 3.17
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 21:27:02 -0700
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
        (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE 
        autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02

Package: rmpi
Severity: serious
Tags: patch
Justification: Policy 2.2.1

Due to C++ libraries in the package, lam had to change shared library
package names as part of the C++ transition.  rmpi now needs to be
rebuilt with the new version of lam so that it can migrate into testing.

Please upload a new version of rmpi with a versioned build-depends on:

    lam4-dev (>= 7.1.1-3.2)

This is necessary since m68k has not yet built the new lam; otherwise,
the new upload may get built against the old lam libraries on that
platform.

If you can get to this soon, that would be best, as all of lam, hdf5,
and mpich are currently caught up in a large transition.

Thanks!

-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell:  /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.4.30
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968) (ignored: LC_ALL set to C)

---------------------------------------
Received: (at 329486-close) by bugs.debian.org; 22 Sep 2005 06:08:09 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Sep 21 23:08:09 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from katie by spohr.debian.org with local (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
        id 1EIK9l-0004VH-00; Wed, 21 Sep 2005 23:02:05 -0700
From: Dirk Eddelbuettel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.56 $
Subject: Bug#329486: fixed in rmpi 0.4.9-2
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 23:02:05 -0700
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
        (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER 
        autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02

Source: rmpi
Source-Version: 0.4.9-2

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
rmpi, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

r-cran-rmpi_0.4.9-2_i386.deb
  to pool/main/r/rmpi/r-cran-rmpi_0.4.9-2_i386.deb
rmpi_0.4.9-2.diff.gz
  to pool/main/r/rmpi/rmpi_0.4.9-2.diff.gz
rmpi_0.4.9-2.dsc
  to pool/main/r/rmpi/rmpi_0.4.9-2.dsc



A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to [EMAIL PROTECTED],
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Dirk Eddelbuettel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (supplier of updated rmpi package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED])


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Format: 1.7
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 00:40:10 -0500
Source: rmpi
Binary: r-cran-rmpi
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.4.9-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Dirk Eddelbuettel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Changed-By: Dirk Eddelbuettel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Description: 
 r-cran-rmpi - GNU R package interfacing MPI libraries for distributed computing
Closes: 329486
Changes: 
 rmpi (0.4.9-2) unstable; urgency=low
 .
   * Rebuilt against newer lam library for C++ transition (Closes: #329486)
   * debian/control: Updated Build-Depends: to lam4-dev (>= 7.1.1-3.2)
 .
   * debian/watch: Corrected regular expression (thanks, Rafael Laboissier)
   * debian/post{inst,rm}: Call /usr/bin/R explicitly (thanks, Kurt Hornik)
   * debian/control: Upgraded Standards-Version: to 3.6.2.1
Files: 
 2f307953f84a04ec3e5b90a76c4f5636 625 math optional rmpi_0.4.9-2.dsc
 8630ab7c3a9ac21ed7b477f464dcbd8d 2233 math optional rmpi_0.4.9-2.diff.gz
 0a64d9ce738465aa4d31f1563c67e2f8 104230 math optional 
r-cran-rmpi_0.4.9-2_i386.deb

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDMkTKCZSR95Gw07cRAjgtAJ9fEkxcMZLtkDje31fDxkZq/yT2jwCdGpXk
GDAtD6zFBOSYDH2Vgm/vkEE=
=mpbu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to