On 24/01/08 at 07:09 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 2008-01-23 at 22:39 -0500, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
Well... as Neil pointed it seems not to be the case -- m68k arch is
still -1 but now it is resolved.
Where are you seeing it as resolved? It's still listed as outstanding
On 24/01/2008, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
Wasn't m68k supposed to be ignored by the BTS, since it's no longer a
released arch? It's already ignored by testing transitions AFAIK.
ISTR that it's the case for hurd-i386 (and it might be “only for”). Ah,
references: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [1] and below.
1.
So it seems not handling bugs status well across releases...
I thought that that is the purpose of specifying tags with release
names so they do not even appear in list of bugs for others (ie etch
bugs in dist=unstable), but they do (example is again that fail2ban
Dear All, may I used your brains a bit
In a fresh package (edac-utils) I have closed a bug in recent upload
(proper Closes statement and a Closes in .changes). But bug remains Done
but not closed: #456644. I know that it would be that way if I uploaded
via sponsor but I am my own sponsor
Hi,
Yaroslav Halchenko wrote, Wednesday, January 23, 2008 8:03 AM
In a fresh package (edac-utils) I have closed a bug in recent upload
(proper Closes statement and a Closes in .changes). But bug remains Done
but not closed: #456644.
From edac-utils' bug index:
Debian Bug report logs: Bugs
On Wed, 2008-01-23 at 03:03 -0500, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
Dear All, may I used your brains a bit
In a fresh package (edac-utils) I have closed a bug in recent upload
(proper Closes statement and a Closes in .changes). But bug remains Done
but not closed: #456644.
Looks OK now - maybe
Well... as Neil pointed it seems not to be the case -- m68k arch is
still -1 but now it is resolved. Also I thought that may be transition
point is migration to testing but not -- it was there on 13th Jan or
so...
Meanwhile for all of you to share the joy ;-) (I wonder why I keep it
open :-))
Hi,
On Wed, 2008-01-23 at 22:39 -0500, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
Well... as Neil pointed it seems not to be the case -- m68k arch is
still -1 but now it is resolved.
Where are you seeing it as resolved? It's still listed as outstanding
on
On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 07:09 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 2008-01-23 at 22:39 -0500, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
Well... as Neil pointed it seems not to be the case -- m68k arch is
still -1 but now it is resolved.
Where are you seeing it as resolved? It's still listed as
9 matches
Mail list logo
