Your message dated Wed, 9 May 2012 11:27:55 -0400
with message-id
<CALiO0=fuf45zpsgmz4p6pua+ko+2v5_au8_1pffbamwbcnl...@mail.gmail.com>
and subject line
has caused the Debian Bug report #672206,
regarding No symbol versions provided
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.)
--
672206: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=672206
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: libbabl-0.1-0:amd64
Version: 0.1.10-1
Severity: important
The shlibs and symbols files provided for libbabl-0.1-0 do not contain
any version information. This means that gimp has an unversioned dependency on
libbabl-0.1-0, when it actually uses some symbols that are only present
in 0.1.10. Adding symbol versions should fix the problem on next gimp
rebuild.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (600, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 3.2.0-2-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.utf8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.utf8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Versions of packages libbabl-0.1-0:amd64 depends on:
ii libc6 2.13-30
ii multiarch-support 2.13-30
libbabl-0.1-0:amd64 recommends no packages.
libbabl-0.1-0:amd64 suggests no packages.
-- no debconf information
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
My mistake.. it appears I was looking at the wrong symbols file, since it
libbabl-0.1-0:amd64.symbols does appear to have correct versioning.
--- End Message ---
