Bug#805424: in apt marked as pending

reassign 806378 bugs.debian.org thanks David, what kind of software are you using to make these reports? Please mention it on bug 806378 and Cc me. Thanks! I see the package name was listed, but the bug title is not. > "DK" == David Kalnischkies writes: DK> Control:

Bug#805424: in apt marked as pending

On Sat, 2015-11-28 at 01:32 +0800, 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson wrote: > reassign 806378 bugs.debian.org > thanks Why? None of the messages that you're discussing are produced by the BTS. Regards, Adam

Bug#805424: Bug#806378: Re: Bug#805424: in apt marked as pending

[oops; adding CC to #806378] On Fri, 2015-11-27 at 18:47 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Sat, 2015-11-28 at 01:32 +0800, 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson wrote: > > reassign 806378 bugs.debian.org > > thanks > > Why? None of the messages that you're discussing are produced by the > BTS. > > Regards, > >

Bug#805424: in apt marked as pending

> "JAK" == Julian Andres Klode writes: JAK> There's no point reassigning 806378 to bugs.debian.org Any better place to reassign it? Even if they are generated differently, when they get to the user they look like they are coming from the same software.

Bug#805424: in apt marked as pending

On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 02:01:50AM +0800, 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson wrote: > > "JAK" == Julian Andres Klode writes: > > JAK> There's no point reassigning 806378 to bugs.debian.org > > Any better place to reassign it? > Even if they are generated differently, > when they get to the

Bug#805424: in apt marked as pending

On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 01:32:09AM +0800, 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson wrote: > reassign 806378 bugs.debian.org > thanks > > David, what kind of software are you using to make these reports? > Please mention it on bug 806378 and Cc me. Thanks! > I see the package name was listed, but the bug title is not.

Bug#805424: in apt marked as pending

> "JAK" == Julian Andres Klode writes: >> JAK> There's no point reassigning 806378 to bugs.debian.org >> >> Any better place to reassign it? >> Even if they are generated differently, >> when they get to the user they look like they are coming from the same >> software.