Bug#340713: Again a bug is shown as outstanding and isn't.
Hi, This time is the bug #353518, taged as fixed and archived and shown as outstanding. Best Regards, Manolo. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#340713: Again a bug is shown as outstanding and isn't.
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Manolo Díaz wrote: This time is the bug #353518, taged as fixed and archived and shown as outstanding. Because it's marked as fixed in 1.5-1, which is a version that doesn't exist anywhere in Debian. It should have been marked closed in 1.5.0.5-1. Don Armstrong -- We were at a chinese resturant. He was yelling at the waitress because there was a typo in his fortune cookie. -- hugh macleod http://www.gapingvoid.com/batch31.php http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Bug#340713: Again a bug is shown as outstanding and isn't.
On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 12:59:37PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Manolo Díaz wrote: This time is the bug #353518, taged as fixed and archived and shown as outstanding. Because it's marked as fixed in 1.5-1, which is a version that doesn't exist anywhere in Debian. It should have been marked closed in 1.5.0.5-1. So the new BTS keeps track of versions that ever existed? Could I close a bug with 1.5-4 (if it was indeed fixed by that version, but slipped through accidentially?) then? - Alexander -- GPG messages preferred. | .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** Alexander Sack| : :' : The universal [EMAIL PROTECTED] | `. `' Operating System http://www.asoftsite.org | `-http://www.debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#340713: Again a bug is shown as outstanding and isn't.
On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Alexander Sack wrote: On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 12:59:37PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: On Tue, 12 Sep 2006, Manolo Díaz wrote: This time is the bug #353518, taged as fixed and archived and shown as outstanding. Because it's marked as fixed in 1.5-1, which is a version that doesn't exist anywhere in Debian. It should have been marked closed in 1.5.0.5-1. So the new BTS keeps track of versions that ever existed? Could I close a bug with 1.5-4 (if it was indeed fixed by that version, but slipped through accidentially?) then? If the version in unstable is a descendant of that version, yes. Otherwise you'll have to mark the first version which the version in unstable is a descendant of that fixed the bug as fixed as well. Don Armstrong -- I leave the show floor, but not before a pack of caffeinated Jolt gum is thrust at me by a hyperactive girl screaming, Chew more! Do more! The American will to consume more and produce more personified in a stick of gum. I grab it. -- Chad Dickerson http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
