On Sun, Sep 02, 2012 at 03:07:09PM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote: > Camaleón wrote: > > Bob Proulx wrote: > > > Camaleón wrote: > > >> But it seems the problem remains (read comment #45) so dunno why it was > > >> archived with apparently no additional clues on the current status: > > > > > > This was the message that closed it. It was sent to 617940-done and so > > > the bug was marked as closed. The other bug was forcibly merged with > > > this one and so it was closed too. > > > > > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=617940#26 > > > > Yes, but regardless the bug status (closed or archived) the issue > > persists as reported later: > > > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=33;bug=617940 > > > > Or is that I am wrongly reading the "notfixed 617940 > > 2:1.0~rc3+svn20090426-2" tag? > > What I see by looking now is: > > * 617940 is/was assigned to the libvdpau1 package > * notfixed 617940 2:1.0~rc3+svn20090426-2 removes any indication that > version 2:1.0~rc3+svn20090426-2 was fixed. > * libvdpau1 never had any version 2:1.0~rc3+svn20090426-2 in the > archive according to http://packages.qa.debian.org/libv/libvdpau.html > and therefore marking it as not fixed does not mark any existing > version as buggy. The version number is just completely bogus. > > I think 2:1.0~rc3+svn20090426-2 was meant to apply to mplayer not > libvdpau1 and therefore the intended bug maintenance actions did not > occur as intended. The bug remained closed and was archived according > to the standard schedule for closed bugs. > > Bob
So what now? -- "If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing." --- Malcolm X -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120903125904.GR25171@tal