Your message dated Tue, 31 Jul 2012 23:08:15 +0200 with message-id <caknhny8gw4qm1oyj0umuowmy07co22lfxjamkj9tvhq5wvm...@mail.gmail.com> and subject line Re: Bug#683446: unblock: libqt4pas/2.5-7 has caused the Debian Bug report #683446, regarding unblock: libqt4pas/2.5-7 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.) -- 683446: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=683446 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: [email protected] Usertags: freeze-exception Please unblock package libqt4pas Rev7 only contains adjustments on the package's symbols file to build on more (now all) architectures. It does not introduce any new issue and is therefore safe to accept for Wheezy. unblock libqt4pas/2.5-7 -- System Information: Debian Release: wheezy/sid Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 3.5.0-6-generic (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---Hi! Okay, if Hurd is not important, we can close this report as invalid. (I don't care about Hurd also, but probably others did) Sorry for the noise! Regards, Matthias 2012/7/31 Adam D. Barratt <[email protected]>: > On Tue, 2012-07-31 at 22:45 +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote: >> Please unblock package libqt4pas >> >> Rev7 only contains adjustments on the package's symbols file to build on more >> (now all) architectures. > > From a scan of the diff, all of the changes appear to be hurd-i386 > related? Given that wheezy won't include any packages on that > architecture, such changes aren't suitable for an unblock. > >> It does not introduce any new issue and is therefore >> safe to accept for Wheezy. > > Non-sequitur. The freeze policy doesn't consist of "does not introduce > any new issue". > > Regards, > > Adam >
--- End Message ---
