(CC list shortened).
Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 09:09:41PM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
>> Luk Claes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> >> Similar the ia64 buildd admin, see #464932. Or is there anything I could
>> >> do myself about this?
>> >
>> > Hmm,
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 09:09:41PM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> Luk Claes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Similar the ia64 buildd admin, see #464932. Or is there anything I could
> >> do myself about this?
> >
> > Hmm, you do realise that lcd4linux is mentioned in P-a-s because it
> > inclu
Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> Similar the ia64 buildd admin, see #464932. Or is there anything I could
> do myself about this?
Well, in the case of #464932, including RM: in the title should improve things
in terms of the removal request being noticed and eventually acted upon.
Kind regards
T.
--
T
Luk Claes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Similar the ia64 buildd admin, see #464932. Or is there anything I could
>> do myself about this?
>
> Hmm, you do realise that lcd4linux is mentioned in P-a-s because it
> includes sys/io.h, right? So this is not similar at all...
Oh, this is indeed news t
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to gmane.linux.debian.devel.general as well.
Petter Reinholdtsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [Steve Langasek]
>> The s390 buildd maintainer presumes to mark all packages as
>> 'Not-for-us' if he doesn't feel like buildi
Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> Petter Reinholdtsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> [Steve Langasek]
>>> The s390 buildd maintainer presumes to mark all packages as
>>> 'Not-for-us' if he doesn't feel like building them for the arch,
>>> without bothering to reach a consensus first together with the
>>
6 matches
Mail list logo
