Oops: rename ITP title

2016-05-23 Thread Ole Streicher
retitle 825062 ITP -- Tk HTML widget thanks I should not re-use the old mail as a template :-) Just to add: I intend to put both packages under the hood of the TclTk team, using its git repository: http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-tcltk/packages/tkmpeg.git

Bug#772827: ITP: kerneloops -- kernel oops tracker

2014-12-11 Thread Balint Reczey
Package: wnpp Owner: Balint Reczey bal...@balintreczey.hu Severity: wishlist X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org * Package name: kerneloops Version : 0.12+git20140509-1 Upstream Author : Arjan van de Ven ar...@linux.intel.com * URL : https://github.com/oops

Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct

2011-04-02 Thread Stanislav Maslovski
Hello, On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 10:44:07AM +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote: On 13/03/11 08:19, Ben Finney wrote: Shachar Shemeshshac...@debian.org writes: I am subscribed to lots and lots of mailing lists. All mail from those lists gets automatically delivered to dedicated folders automatically.

Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct

2011-04-02 Thread Paul Wise
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 7:29 AM, Stanislav Maslovski wrote: My trick to get extra copies of direct replies to my own mails in mailing lists (I place such copies into a dedicated folder) is to keep a local cache of Message-IDs of my own sent messages and then check In-Reply-To: header in the

Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct

2011-03-17 Thread Michelle Konzack
Hello Shachar Shemesh, Am 2011-03-13 19:54:01, hacktest Du folgendes herunter: If I set reply-to to myself, the mail won't go to the list. If I set it to the list, it won't go to me. Either way, the desired effect isn't achieved. Also, reply-to is the wrong tool for this job (this is NOT

Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct

2011-03-17 Thread Michelle Konzack
Hello Carsten Hey, Am 2011-03-12 10:50:03, hacktest Du folgendes herunter: If a message I reply to contains a Mail-Followup-To: set, I use it. If not, I guess if the person I reply to wants to receive a reply. To prevent me to Cc: you, you need to explicitly set Mail-Followup-To: to the

Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct

2011-03-13 Thread Shachar Shemesh
On 13/03/11 08:19, Ben Finney wrote: Shachar Shemeshshac...@debian.org writes: Personally, I think the code of conduct should be amended, along with the list software. While this shouldn't turn into a counting of popularity, I'd like to register that there are people who think the

Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct

2011-03-13 Thread Josselin Mouette
Le samedi 12 mars 2011 à 10:50 +0100, Carsten Hey a écrit : I set Mail-Followup-To: on every mail I send to *@lists.debian.org. Most DDs just ignore it (though there are some exceptions) and this renders using Mail-Followup-To: to get a copy to be rather useless. Maybe this is because

Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct

2011-03-13 Thread Andrei Popescu
On Du, 13 mar 11, 10:44:07, Shachar Shemesh wrote: On 13/03/11 08:19, Ben Finney wrote: If you like to get two copies, why can't you arrange to generate the extra copies you want without involving anyone else's configuration? Any suggestions on how to do it? By setting 'Reply-To:'

Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct

2011-03-13 Thread Shachar Shemesh
On 13/03/11 11:29, Andrei Popescu wrote: Any suggestions on how to do it? By setting 'Reply-To:' appropriately, this is what it's for. If I set reply-to to myself, the mail won't go to the list. If I set it to the list, it won't go to me. Either way, the desired effect isn't

Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct

2011-03-13 Thread Andrei Popescu
On Du, 13 mar 11, 19:54:01, Shachar Shemesh wrote: On 13/03/11 11:29, Andrei Popescu wrote: Any suggestions on how to do it? By setting 'Reply-To:' appropriately, this is what it's for. If I set reply-to to myself, the mail won't go to the list. If I set it to the list, it won't go to me.

Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct

2011-03-13 Thread Shachar Shemesh
On 13/03/11 20:55, Andrei Popescu wrote: At least with mutt I distinctively recall it replied both to the list and CCd the poster on list-reply. That is a specific Mutt work around for broken lists that add reply-to automatically. It is not generally available. Not sure about other mailers

Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct

2011-03-12 Thread Carsten Hey
* jida...@jidanni.org [2011-03-12 11:14 +0800]: Recently I replied to a certain message on this list with my familiar S W runs the command gnus-summary-wide-reply-with-original keystrokes, only to receive I'm subscribed to the list, no need to CC me:

Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct

2011-03-12 Thread Carsten Hey
* Carsten Hey [2011-03-12 10:50 +0100]: There are examples where we lost potential future maintainers because they never received a reply to an RFS. These replies were sent to the list, but they were not sent to those requesting sponsorship. To clarify this: the problem was not that

Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct

2011-03-12 Thread The Fungi
On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 12:57:29PM +0100, Carsten Hey wrote: [...] How should new people know that they don't get a copy of replies to their messages unless they explicitly request one? Maybe it's a generational difference... as I expect did authors of the code of conduct, I came up on bulletin

Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct

2011-03-12 Thread Ben Finney
Shachar Shemesh shac...@debian.org writes: Personally, I think the code of conduct should be amended, along with the list software. While this shouldn't turn into a counting of popularity, I'd like to register that there are people who think the list behaviour currently (leave the Reply-To

oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct

2011-03-11 Thread jidanni
Recently I replied to a certain message on this list with my familiar S W runs the command gnus-summary-wide-reply-with-original keystrokes, only to receive I'm subscribed to the list, no need to CC me: http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct No need to reply to this message. And

Re: oops I sent a courtesy copy in violation of the code of conduct

2011-03-11 Thread Shachar Shemesh
On 12/03/11 05:14, jida...@jidanni.org wrote: Therefore perhaps http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct could be amended to mention that adding a Mail-Followup-To header might add an additional wall of defense for those who wish to cut down even further the possibility they might

Re: Oops: I broke the lenny -- squeeze update

2010-11-22 Thread Philipp Kern
On 2010-11-22, Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org wrote: On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Steve M. Robbins wrote: The rtupdate script has since been changed (in unstable) to avoid this problem, but I'm not sure what can be done for stable users other than recommending to purge the above four packages

Re: Oops: I broke the lenny -- squeeze update

2010-11-22 Thread Luk Claes
On 11/22/2010 11:11 AM, Philipp Kern wrote: On 2010-11-22, Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org wrote: On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Steve M. Robbins wrote: The rtupdate script has since been changed (in unstable) to avoid this problem, but I'm not sure what can be done for stable users other than

Re: Oops: I broke the lenny -- squeeze update

2010-11-22 Thread Jakub Wilk
* Steve M. Robbins st...@sumost.ca, 2010-11-22, 01:08: I just received notice (bug 603579) that upgrade lenny to squeeze will break if a boost package containing an rtupdate script is installed. In stable there are four such packages: libboost-python-dev libboost-dbg libboost-python1.35-dev

Re: Oops: I broke the lenny -- squeeze update

2010-11-22 Thread Thomas Hochstein
Philipp Kern wrote: On 2010-11-22, Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org wrote: The release notes usually recommend to have the latest stable packages before proceeding with the upgrade. Are they? They did: | 4.2 Checking system status [...] | This procedure also assumes your system has

Oops: I broke the lenny -- squeeze update

2010-11-21 Thread Steve M. Robbins
Hi, I just received notice (bug 603579) that upgrade lenny to squeeze will break if a boost package containing an rtupdate script is installed. In stable there are four such packages: libboost-python-dev libboost-dbg libboost-python1.35-dev libboost1.35-dbg The issue is that the

Re: Oops: I broke the lenny -- squeeze update

2010-11-21 Thread Raphael Hertzog
Hi, On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Steve M. Robbins wrote: The rtupdate script has since been changed (in unstable) to avoid this problem, but I'm not sure what can be done for stable users other than recommending to purge the above four packages prior to upgrade. Is there any way to do this

Accepted oops 1.5.23.cvs-5.1 (source i386)

2007-02-27 Thread Christian Perrier
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 18:47:28 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.5.23.cvs-5.1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Christian Perrier [EMAIL

Accepted oops 1.5.23.cvs-5 (source i386)

2007-01-25 Thread Reinhard Tartler
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 09:26:47 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.5.23.cvs-5 Distribution: unstable Urgency: medium Maintainer: Reinhard Tartler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Reinhard Tartler [EMAIL

Accepted oops 1.5.23.cvs-4 (source amd64)

2007-01-12 Thread Reinhard Tartler
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 08:49:04 + Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: source amd64 Version: 1.5.23.cvs-4 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Reinhard Tartler [EMAIL PROTECTED

Accepted oops 1.5.23.cvs-3 (source i386)

2006-01-26 Thread Reinhard Tartler
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:32:14 + Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.5.23.cvs-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Reinhard Tartler [EMAIL PROTECTED

Accepted oops 1.5.23.cvs-2.2 (source i386)

2005-12-06 Thread Neil McGovern
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 13:09:20 + Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.5.23.cvs-2.2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: high Maintainer: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Neil McGovern [EMAIL PROTECTED

Accepted lambdamoo 1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-1 (i386 source)

2005-02-02 Thread Jonathan Walther
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Format: 1.7 Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 16:03:22 -0700 Source: lambdamoo Binary: lambdamoo Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Jonathan Walther [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Jonathan Walther [EMAIL

Accepted lambdamoo 1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-2 (i386 source)

2005-02-02 Thread Jonathan Walther
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Format: 1.7 Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 17:45:22 -0700 Source: lambdamoo Binary: lambdamoo Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2.2-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Jonathan Walther [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Jonathan Walther [EMAIL

Accepted lambdamoo 1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2-2 (i386 source)

2005-01-31 Thread Jonathan Walther
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2005 1:02:20 -0700 Source: lambdamoo Binary: lambdamoo Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.8.2-oops-1.8.1w2-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Jonathan Walther [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Jonathan Walther [EMAIL

Accepted oops 1.5.23.cvs-2 (i386 source)

2004-05-22 Thread Michael Zehrer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sat, 22 May 2004 15:43:00 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.5.23.cvs-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED

Accepted oops 1.5.23.cvs-1 (i386 source)

2004-02-08 Thread Michael Zehrer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2004 10:06:00 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.5.23.cvs-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED

Accepted oops 1.5.23-1 (i386 source)

2004-01-11 Thread Michael Zehrer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 12:18:05 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.5.23-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED

OOPS!: Re: UserLinux white paper

2003-12-02 Thread Bruce Perens
That's userlinux.com . I don't have the .org, some domain squatter has that. Thanks Bruce On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 12:04:31PM +, bruce wrote: I did a first pass at the UserLinux white paper, it's at http://userlinux.org/white_paper.html. I think I'll sleep for a while.

Accepted guile-oops 1.0.2-2.3 (i386 source all)

2003-08-25 Thread Gunnar Wolf
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2003 18:26:10 -0500 Source: guile-oops Binary: goops-doc libgoops5-dev goops libgoops5 Architecture: source all i386 Version: 1.0.2-2.3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Mikael Djurfeldt [EMAIL PROTECTED

Accepted oops 1.5.22-2 (i386 source)

2003-01-02 Thread Michael Zehrer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 10:18:11 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.5.22-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED

Accepted oops 1.5.22-1 (i386 source)

2002-12-30 Thread Michael Zehrer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2002 17:35:50 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: source i386 Version: 1.5.22-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Michael Zehrer [EMAIL PROTECTED

Uploaded oops 1.5.19.cvs.20010818-0.1 (m68k) to erlangen

2001-11-14 Thread m68k build daemon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 14:49:43 -0500 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: m68k Version: 1.5.19.cvs.20010818-0.1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/m68k Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Eric Gillespie [EMAIL PROTECTED

Uploaded guile-oops 1.0.2-2.2 (m68k) to ftp-master

2001-10-20 Thread Debian/m68k buildd2
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 14:06:29 -0600 Source: guile-oops Binary: goops-doc goops libgoops5-dev libgoops5 Architecture: m68k Version: 1.0.2-2.2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/m68k buildd2 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed

Uploaded guile-oops 1.0.2-2.2 (sparc) to ftp-master

2001-10-18 Thread Debian/SPARC Build Daemon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 14:06:29 -0600 Source: guile-oops Binary: goops-doc goops libgoops5-dev libgoops5 Architecture: sparc Version: 1.0.2-2.2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/sparc Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED

Uploaded oops 1.5.19.cvs.20010818 (m68k) to erlangen

2001-08-21 Thread m68k build daemon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Format: 1.7 Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 17:26:19 +0200 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: m68k Version: 1.5.19.cvs.20010818 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/m68k Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED

Uploaded oops 1.5.19.cvs.20010818 (sparc) to ftp-master

2001-08-20 Thread Debian/SPARC Build Daemon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 17:26:19 +0200 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: sparc Version: 1.5.19.cvs.20010818 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/sparc Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL

Uploaded guile-oops 1.0.2-2.1 (sparc) to ftp-master

2001-07-04 Thread Debian/SPARC Build Daemon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2001 15:52:06 +0100 Source: guile-oops Binary: goops-doc goops libgoops5-dev libgoops5 Architecture: sparc Version: 1.0.2-2.1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian GNU/Linux SPARC/UltraSPARC Build Daemon

Uploaded oops 1.5.18.cvs.20010515-1 (sparc) to ftp-master

2001-05-16 Thread Debian/SPARC Build Daemon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 09:22:04 +0200 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: sparc Version: 1.5.18.cvs.20010515-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/SPARC Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL

Uploaded oops 1.5.15.cvs.20010406-1 (m68k) to erlangen

2001-04-16 Thread buildd m68k user account
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Format: 1.7 Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 11:47:49 +0200 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: m68k Version: 1.5.15.cvs.20010406-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: buildd m68k user account [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED

Uploaded oops 1.5.15.cvs.20010406-1 (sparc) to ftp-master

2001-04-09 Thread Debian/SPARC Build Daemon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 11:47:49 +0200 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: sparc Version: 1.5.15.cvs.20010406-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/SPARC Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL

Uploaded oops 1.5.15.cvs.20010328-1 (sparc) to ftp-master

2001-03-29 Thread Debian/SPARC Build Daemon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 11:16:21 +0200 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: sparc Version: 1.5.15.cvs.20010328-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/SPARC Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL

Uploaded oops 1.5.7-3 (m68k) to erlangen

2001-03-22 Thread m68k build daemon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 00:47:01 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: m68k Version: 1.5.7-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/m68k Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description

Uploaded guile-oops 1.0.2-1 (m68k) to erlangen

2001-03-13 Thread Debian/m68k Build Daemon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 20:22:40 -0500 Source: guile-oops Binary: goops-doc goops libgoops5-dev libgoops5 Architecture: m68k Version: 1.0.2-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: high Maintainer: Debian/m68k Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED

Uploaded guile-oops 1.0.2-1 (sparc) to ftp-master

2001-03-13 Thread Debian/SPARC Build Daemon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 20:22:40 -0500 Source: guile-oops Binary: goops-doc goops libgoops5-dev libgoops5 Architecture: sparc Version: 1.0.2-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: high Maintainer: Debian/SPARC Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED

Uploaded guile-oops 1.0.0-1 (sparc) to ftp-master

2001-03-10 Thread Debian/SPARC Build Daemon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2001 00:50:45 -0500 Source: guile-oops Binary: goops-doc goops libgoops5-dev libgoops5 Architecture: sparc Version: 1.0.0-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: high Maintainer: Debian/SPARC Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED

Uploaded oops 1.5.7-3 (sparc) to ftp-master

2001-02-26 Thread Debian/SPARC Build Daemon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 00:47:01 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: sparc Version: 1.5.7-3 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/SPARC Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED

Uploaded oops 1.5.7-2 (sparc) to ftp-master

2001-01-31 Thread Debian/SPARC Build Daemon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 15:03:13 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: sparc Version: 1.5.7-2 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/SPARC Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED

Uploaded oops 1.5.7-1 (sparc) to ftp-master

2001-01-27 Thread Debian/SPARC Build Daemon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 14:27:42 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: sparc Version: 1.5.7-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/SPARC Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED

Uploaded oops 1.5.7 (sparc) to ftp-master

2001-01-26 Thread Debian/SPARC Build Daemon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 19:59:26 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: sparc Version: 1.5.7 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/SPARC Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED

Uploaded oops 1.5.6-1 (sparc) to ftp-master

2001-01-25 Thread Debian/SPARC Build Daemon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 01:03:35 +0100 Source: oops Binary: oops Architecture: sparc Version: 1.5.6-1 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: Debian/SPARC Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Tamas SZERB [EMAIL PROTECTED

Oops

2000-12-25 Thread Eray Ozkural \(exa\)
Mistakenly sent to debian-devel. This is off topic. Merry Xmas to you all!! Cheers, -- Eray (exa) Ozkural Comp. Sci. Dept., Bilkent University, Ankara e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www: http://www.cs.bilkent.edu.tr/~erayo

GTK oops?

1999-01-31 Thread Jules Bean
Dear overworked gtk maintainer... Did you deliberately upload a version 1.1.14 of gtk1.1.13? Looks confused to me.. Jules /+---+-\ | Jelibean aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 6 Evelyn Rd| | Jules aka | [EMAIL

Re: GTK oops?

1999-01-31 Thread Jules Bean
On Sun, 31 Jan 1999, Jules Bean wrote: Dear overworked gtk maintainer... Did you deliberately upload a version 1.1.14 of gtk1.1.13? Looks confused to me.. Doh! I'll shut up now. Lesson - read the changelog.. Jules /+---+-\

Re: GTK oops?

1999-01-31 Thread Jules Bean
On Sun, 31 Jan 1999, Jules Bean wrote: On Sun, 31 Jan 1999, Jules Bean wrote: Dear overworked gtk maintainer... Did you deliberately upload a version 1.1.14 of gtk1.1.13? Looks confused to me.. Doh! I'll shut up now. Lesson - read the changelog.. Going for the record in

Re: GTK oops?

1999-01-31 Thread David Starner
Jules Bean wrote: On Sun, 31 Jan 1999, Jules Bean wrote: On Sun, 31 Jan 1999, Jules Bean wrote: Dear overworked gtk maintainer... Did you deliberately upload a version 1.1.14 of gtk1.1.13? Looks confused to me.. Doh! I'll shut up now. Lesson - read the changelog..

Re: GTK oops?

1999-01-31 Thread Ben Gertzfield
Jules == Jules Bean [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jules Dear overworked gtk maintainer... Did you deliberately Jules upload a version 1.1.14 of gtk1.1.13? Looks confused to Jules me.. It was deliberate, but it was a mistake. The GTK+ maintainers told me 1.1.14 was binary compatible

Oops

1998-06-26 Thread Michael Meskes
Sorry for the last one. Should have gone to request. But I'm in a hurry. My boss decided to strip my remote login rights without telling me. Boy, am I glad I leave this company! Michael -- Dr. Michael Meskes, Project-Manager| topsystem Systemhaus GmbH [EMAIL PROTECTED]|

oops

1997-12-07 Thread Hamish Moffatt
Sorry, I was having hassles with my local mail system broken reverse DNS here and accidentally resent an unstable upload announcement to debian-devel-announce instead of debian-devel-changes. :-( hamish -- Hamish Moffatt, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Latest Debian

Bug#3320: Kernel oops - problem with APM BIOS?

1996-06-18 Thread Marek Michalkiewicz
Package: (bootdisk) Version: 1996_6_16 APM support is enabled in the 2.0 kernel on this bootdisk. Some green motherboards have problems with this, resulting in kernel oops every time during kernel startup (before mounting the root filesystem). Turning off power management in BIOS setup doesn't