Your message dated Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:36:56 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#334192: mutt-ng: perhaps use alternatives with mutt?
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; 16 Oct 2005 07:46:51 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Oct 16 00:46:51 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from smtpout1.uol.com.br (smtp.uol.com.br) [200.221.4.192]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1ER3EJ-00059k-00; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 00:46:51 -0700
Received: from [200.221.104.251] (unknown [200.221.104.251])
by scorpion1.uol.com.br (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBD9287D0
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 05:46:10 -0200 (BRST)
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 05:45:44 -0200
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Rog=E9rio_Brito?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
User-Agent: Debian Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050602)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: mutt-ng: perhaps use alternatives with mutt?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
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: mutt-ng
Version: 0.0+20050916-1
Severity: wishlist
Hi there.
I saw that muttng is already in the experimental repository of Debian pro=
per and=20
decided to try it. My first impression on it is that it is a quite good=20
improvement upon mutt (e.g., the name of the variables are more consisten=
t etc).
Unfortunately, some tools (like reportbug, when invoked with -M) call mut=
t=20
directly and it would be nice for the system administrators that installe=
d=20
muttng to be able to choose what to use via the update-alternatives infra=
=20
structure provided by Debian.
I would be very grateful if it were possible to use this scheme, so that =
I would=20
use muttng in more situations.
BTW, I do see one minor problem with the naming of muttng: I see the name=
s=20
mutt-ng and muttng being used without consistency in both the sites,=20
documentation, command line interface (the name of the executable) etc.
It would be nice to have a consistent naming.
Thanks for packaging it, Rog=E9rio Brito.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (900, 'testing')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.14-rc4-1
Locale: LANG=3DC, LC_CTYPE=3Dpt_BR (charmap=3DISO-8859-1)
Versions of packages mutt-ng depends on:
ii libc6 2.3.5-6 GNU C Library: Shared librar=
ies an
ii libgnutls11 1.0.16-13.1 GNU TLS library - runtime li=
brary
ii libidn11 0.5.18-1 GNU libidn library, implemen=
tation
ii libncursesw5 5.4-9 Shared libraries for termina=
l hand
ii libqdbm11 1.8.30-1 QDBM Database Libraries [run=
time]
ii libsasl2 2.1.19-1.5 Authentication abstraction l=
ibrary
ii qmail [mail-transport-agent] 1.03-9 DJB's qmail
mutt-ng recommends no packages.
-- no debconf information
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 334192-close) by bugs.debian.org; 16 Oct 2005 09:37:01 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Oct 16 02:37:01 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from h01.hostsharing.net (pima.hostsharing.net) [212.42.230.152]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1ER4wv-0000x2-00; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 02:37:01 -0700
Received: from mail.home.lxtec.de (p549EE7F1.dip.t-dialin.net [84.158.231.241])
(using TLSv1 with cipher DES-CBC3-SHA (168/168 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by pima.hostsharing.net (Postfix) with ESMTP
id 0344FB64B9; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:37:00 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1])
by mail.home.lxtec.de with esmtp (Exim 4.54 1 (LXTEC))
id 1ER4wt-0006mM-KS; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:36:59 +0200
Received: from mail.home.lxtec.de ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (mail.home.lxtec.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id 25606-07; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:36:56 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from aragorn.home.lxtec.de ([192.168.200.203])
by mail.home.lxtec.de with esmtps (Exim 4.54 1 (LXTEC))
id 1ER4wq-0006mE-Ex; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:36:56 +0200
Received: from riesebie by aragorn.home.lxtec.de with local (Exim 4.54)
id 1ER4wq-0001gS-9M; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:36:56 +0200
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:36:56 +0200
From: Elimar Riesebieter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: =?iso-8859-15?Q?Rog=E9rio?= Brito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Bug#334192: mutt-ng: perhaps use alternatives with mutt?
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Fba/0zbH8Xs+Fj9o"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Organization: LXTEC
X-gnupg-key-fingerprint: BE65 85E4 4867 7E9B 1F2A B2CE DC88 3C6E C54F 7FB0
User-Agent: mutt-ng/devel-r551 (Debian-PPC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new 2.3.3 (DEBIAN) at mail.home.lxtec.de
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
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 2
--Fba/0zbH8Xs+Fj9o
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 the mental interface of
Rog=E9rio Brito told:
> Package: mutt-ng
> Version: 0.0+20050916-1
> Severity: wishlist
>=20
> Hi there.
>=20
> I saw that muttng is already in the experimental repository of Debian pro=
per=20
> and decided to try it. My first impression on it is that it is a quite go=
od=20
> improvement upon mutt (e.g., the name of the variables are more consisten=
t=20
> etc).
>=20
> Unfortunately, some tools (like reportbug, when invoked with -M) call mut=
t=20
> directly and it would be nice for the system administrators that installe=
d=20
> muttng to be able to choose what to use via the update-alternatives infra=
=20
> structure provided by Debian.
See Bug#334171
> I would be very grateful if it were possible to use this scheme, so that =
I=20
> would use muttng in more situations.
>=20
> BTW, I do see one minor problem with the naming of muttng: I see the name=
s=20
> mutt-ng and muttng being used without consistency in both the sites,=20
> documentation, command line interface (the name of the executable) etc.
The name is mutt-ng, created by ak. libc6 doesn#t accept binaries
including a '-'-character in zs name so it is muttng.
> It would be nice to have a consistent naming.
Not possible
Please don't send bugs twice.
Elimar
--=20
Do you smell something burning or ist it me?
--Fba/0zbH8Xs+Fj9o
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFDUh843Ig8bsVPf7ARApmaAJwK3zFkvO//VmbgJMf+LO9HiMm7lgCfd+6s
P1jahD+FIrDgIxVajO33B10=
=L/l2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--Fba/0zbH8Xs+Fj9o--
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
