Your message dated Thu, 12 May 2005 21:14:59 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line was fixed I believe
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; 18 Oct 2002 07:11:43 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Oct 18 02:11:41 2002
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from gprs1.vodafone.hu (sanctuary.grin.hu) [80.244.96.193]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 182RII-0001Vs-00; Fri, 18 Oct 2002 02:11:40 -0500
Received: from grin by sanctuary.grin.hu with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
id 182RHj-0005Go-00; Fri, 18 Oct 2002 09:11:03 +0200
From: Peter Gervai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [FAQ] links: links v2.xx (graphical), links+ssl in main, elinks
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Mailer: bug 3.3.10.2
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: grin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 09:11:03 +0200
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0
tests=SPAM_PHRASE_05_08
version=2.41
X-Spam-Level:
Package: links
Version: N/A
Severity: wishlist
FAQ.
Q: 'links', 'links-ssl', 'elinks', which should I use?
A: I prefer 'elinks'. I see no point to use 'links' (without ssl) unless you
live in a weird crypto-free country. 'links-ssl' does not really give you
any advancement over 'elinks'. You can download 'links2' and try its
graphical features and javascript simulation, though.
Q: Will the links 2.xx (graphical client) be packaged?
A: It is packaged, but not yet included in main due to lack of testing (and
see next Q). Test and report whether it's work for you. See
ftp://yikes.tolna.net/pub/linux/release/debian/ for the package.
Q: Will links 2.xx be included in main?
A: Without SSL unless they change the license, which now conflicts between
OpenSSL and GPL. RSN.
Q: Why links2 does not work with svgalib?
A: Because you have to be root to do that. No, I will not suid root it, it's
too big and unaudited. Yes, you can always use sudo.
Q: Will be package 'links' contain original code and not ELinks in main?
A: Yes. Pending. Hold your breath. See links-ssl or elinks until then.
Q: Will 'links' in main contain SSL?
A: No, unless either it links against GNUTLS or changes licence, see Q2.
Q: Will ELinks contain SSL in main?
Q: Why isn't there elinks-ssl?
A: It already does support SSL, friend. Why don't you check first? (It is
linked against GNUTLS, no licence problems.)
Q: Your ftpserver isn't working!!!!!
A: Try next day. I had a problem with the hardware.
Q: Why do you submit bugs against your own package?
A: Because I am an optimist and hope that you check BTS first, complain
after. (links2 package does not exist yet, so no readme for it yet)
A: Because not all of you do read readme.Debian, for unexplainable reasons.
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 165277-done) by bugs.debian.org; 12 May 2005 19:15:26 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu May 12 12:15:26 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from lifeforce.hu (narya.grin.hu) [195.38.113.134]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1DWJ9Z-000580-00; Thu, 12 May 2005 12:15:26 -0700
Received: from localhost.lifeforce.hu ([127.0.0.1] helo=narya)
by narya.grin.hu with esmtpsa (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32)
(Exim 4.50)
id 1DWJ9B-0006xB-QX; Thu, 12 May 2005 21:15:21 +0200
Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 21:14:59 +0200
From: Peter Gervai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: was fixed I believe
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Organization: Disorganized
X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 1.9.6cvs1 (GTK+ 2.6.7; i386-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: -5.8 (-----)
X-Scan-Signature: 0acd0580846ecc5ab44799d635b0cb7c
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-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_01 autolearn=no
version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level:
these were fixed as far as I see (either it's fixed, I cannot reproduce or they
seem to be
left alone by the submitter).
if it's still valid please reopen and tell me about it.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
