Am 11.08.2010 16:16, schrieb Julien Cristau:
Uploaded a followup NMU with the below diff. The configure bashism
stuff is not worth it at this point IMO.
I believe you should *not* revert reasonable changes in an NMU, but
I'll leave this decision up to you. Maybe it's easier to convince the
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 8:46 AM, Fabian Greffrath fab...@greffrath.com wrote:
Am 11.08.2010 16:16, schrieb Julien Cristau:
Uploaded a followup NMU with the below diff. The configure bashism
stuff is not worth it at this point IMO.
I believe you should *not* revert reasonable changes in an
Am 12.08.2010 11:08, schrieb Bastien ROUCARIES:
As a comaintenair I agree with this NMU,
The configure bashism could wait last realease
Okay, fine.
- Fabian
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
Julien,
your re-upload of imagemagick 8:6.6.0.4-2.1 reopened three bugs that
have been fixed in the meantime by imagemagick 7:6.6.2.6-1. Please get
this right ASAP.
- Fabian
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble?
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:01:12 +0200, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
Julien,
your re-upload of imagemagick 8:6.6.0.4-2.1 reopened three bugs that
have been fixed in the meantime by imagemagick 7:6.6.2.6-1. Please
get this right ASAP.
Uploaded a followup NMU with the below diff. The configure
found 579775 8:6.6.0.4-2.1
thanks
This bug has been reintroduced by the current NMU. Please change the
Recommends on ufraw to ufraw-batch again.
- Fabian
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
6 matches
Mail list logo
