* Simon Huggins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [080509 12:20]: > On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 10:39:28AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > > On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 10:37:51AM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: > > > On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 09:27:12AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > > > > telegnome (- to 0.1.0-3) > > > > Maintainer: Colin Watson > > > > Too young, only 1 of 10 days old > > > > out of date on alpha: telegnome (from 0.0.10-7) > > > > out of date on hppa: telegnome (from 0.0.10-7) > > > > telegnome (source, i386, alpha, amd64, arm, hppa, ia64, mips, > > > > mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc, armel) has new bugs! > > > > Updating telegnome introduces new bugs: #464331 > > > > Not considered > > > In BugsV there is "telegnome 464331". This is because the package is > > > not in sync on all architectures and thus contains buggy versions in > > > unstable (0.0.10-7). > > Ah, right. Sorry for the false alarm, then! > > It does say "introduces new bugs" (twice) and "has new bugs". These > aren't true; the bugs are only in the out of date package.
Not correct. In case it would migrate to testing as is, a new RC bug would be present in some of the binary packages. In case only armel would be out-of-date, it would even be relevant to not allow testing migration. Cheers, Andi -- http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
