Your message dated Wed, 28 May 2008 14:59:33 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Re: Bug#483354: rxtx incorrectly listed in
Packages-arch-specific
has caused the Debian Bug report #483354,
regarding rxtx incorrectly listed in Packages-arch-specific
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 this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
immediately.)
--
483354: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=483354
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: ftp.debian.org
Severity: normal
Hello,
the package rxtx is currently only built on i386, because it is listed
in Packages-arch-specific[1] as # Depend on jdk1.1
The package does not depend on jdk1.1 anymore, and the source package
builds fine on my amd64 system. The maintainer is aware of the problem,
has already tried to request a change in the file, got no answer and
gave up.
I then tried to request a change in the file by mailing the people
listed at the top of the file on the 3rd of April 2008 and got no answer
so far either.
Since it's hard to track the progess on the issue if everything stays on
private mail, I'm opening a bug here.
Regards,
Enrico
[1] http://cvs.debian.org/srcdep/Packages-arch-specific?root=dak&view=markup
-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (500, 'testing')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.25-1-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 11399 March 1977, Enrico Zini wrote:
> the package rxtx is currently only built on i386, because it is listed
> in Packages-arch-specific[1] as # Depend on jdk1.1
We do not maintain that file, we cant help you
> Since it's hard to track the progess on the issue if everything stays on
> private mail, I'm opening a bug here.
Wrong, closed - sorry, but the ftp team is *not* responsible for the
file, nor do we have any access to it.
The file itself says who to mail to, and yes, those are private mail
addresses. But ftp.d.o is the wrong place for a bug in P-a-s
--
bye, Joerg
<liw> I'm kinky and perverse, but my illness is laziness
--- End Message ---
