On Mon, 30 Jun 2008, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 11:01:43PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
>
> > there was no patch provided nor any proof of any trouble by your
> > side, so tagging with moreinfo and willl close in 10 days
> > unless something substantial comes up.
>
> Uh, mess
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 11:01:43PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> there was no patch provided nor any proof of any trouble by your
> side, so tagging with moreinfo and willl close in 10 days
> unless something substantial comes up.
Uh, message 10 of the bug report contains the updated version
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 08:42:11PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> As far as I remember (this was all quite some time ago) the external
> module packages were all using forked copies of this code; IIRC the
> patch I have provided largely merged these in.
hmm reopening a but on a wrong fact.
i strong
reopen 436260
thanks
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 03:48:07PM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> closing as this general assumption seems not true
> quite a bunch of external modules is build.
As far as I remember (this was all quite some time ago) the external
module packages were all using f
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reopen 436260
Bug#436260: linux-support-2.6.22-1: Support for exernal module packages broken
Bug reopened, originator not changed.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(
5 matches
Mail list logo
