Bug#351658: [Pkg-spca5xx-devel] Bug#351658: spca5xx-modules-2.6-k7-smp: doesn't depend on the corresponding kernel package

2006-02-07 Thread Gerfried Fuchs
* Kel Modderman [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-02-07 06:15]: Gerfried Fuchs wrote: Furthermore, a mailinglist -request address as maintainer address is a *very* bad idea, I seriously hope you consider changing that, too. I did not see this in our sources anywhere, can you please be more specific

Bug#351658: [Pkg-spca5xx-devel] Bug#351658: spca5xx-modules-2.6-k7-smp: doesn't depend on the corresponding kernel package

2006-02-07 Thread Kel Modderman
Gerfried Fuchs wrote: * Kel Modderman [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-02-07 06:15]: Gerfried Fuchs wrote: Furthermore, a mailinglist -request address as maintainer address is a *very* bad idea, I seriously hope you consider changing that, too. I did not see this in our sources

Bug#351658: [Pkg-spca5xx-devel] Bug#351658: spca5xx-modules-2.6-k7-smp: doesn't depend on the corresponding kernel package

2006-02-06 Thread Kel Modderman
Gerfried Fuchs wrote: Package: spca5xx-modules-2.6.15-1-686 Version: 20060101+1 Severity: serious Justification: Policy 7.2 Hi! The modules packages slipped into testing because they don't depend on their corresponding kernel images they are built against. They don't make any sense