fixed 657061 0.8.16~exp12
thanks
David Kalnischkies kalnischkies+deb...@gmail.com (28/01/2012):
I remember problems with Descriptions in case of splitout longdesc and
multiarch and rewrote parts of the description handling in experimental
a while ago, but i can't remember problems with
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 22:24, Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org wrote:
Julian Andres Klode j...@debian.org (24/01/2012):
Do an apt-cache show or grep-aptavail -P libpostproc52 (or both), and
look whether the record is correct. Or look at the file directly and
check whether it is correct.
David Kalnischkies kalnischkies+deb...@gmail.com (28/01/2012):
I remember problems with Descriptions in case of splitout longdesc and
multiarch and rewrote parts of the description handling in experimental
a while ago, but i can't remember problems with Filename handling,
as this is pretty
Julian Andres Klode j...@debian.org (24/01/2012):
Do an apt-cache show or grep-aptavail -P libpostproc52 (or both), and
look whether the record is correct. Or look at the file directly and
check whether it is correct.
FWIW, it moved to:
| 108 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 2 to remove and 0 not
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 09:10:36PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Package: apt
Version: 0.8.15.9
Severity: important
Hi,
this might be due to the recent changes in the archive but anyway:
| kibi@bowmore:~$ sudo apt-get dist-upgrade
| Reading package lists... Done
| Building dependency
Julian Andres Klode j...@debian.org (24/01/2012):
Do an apt-cache show or grep-aptavail -P libpostproc52 (or both), and
look whether the record is correct.
The former is NOK, the latter is OK:
,---[ NOK ]---
| kibi@bowmore:~$ apt-cache show libpostproc52
| Package: libpostproc52
| Source:
Package: apt
Version: 0.8.15.9
Severity: important
Hi,
this might be due to the recent changes in the archive but anyway:
| kibi@bowmore:~$ sudo apt-get dist-upgrade
| Reading package lists... Done
| Building dependency tree
| Reading state information... Done
| Calculating upgrade...
7 matches
Mail list logo
