Hi Daniel,
On Wed, 2007-12-19 at 00:39:00 +0100, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 18.12.2007, 20:40 + schrieb Ian Jackson:
> > If there were a well-tested and sensible fix, with a clear explanation
> > of what the bug was and how the patch corrects it, which hadn't been
> > merged, the
Am Mittwoch, den 19.12.2007, 00:39 +0100 schrieb Daniel Leidert:
> The problem is caused in config_alternatives() near line 680. There
> simply the link in /etc/alternatives is created, but it is not checked,
> if $slavelinks[$slnum] exists. Now there is some code at line 597 for
> the "auto" actio
tags 220044 + patch
thanks
Am Dienstag, den 18.12.2007, 20:40 + schrieb Ian Jackson:
> Manuel Prinz writes ("Re: Can anybody *please* fix #220044 - broken slave
> files (link)"):
> > I spent some time on trying to fix it myself but failed because I lacked
> > of time to dive into u-a. I'd lik
Dear Ian!
Ian Jackson wrote:
> Manuel Prinz writes ("Re: Can anybody *please* fix #220044 - broken slave
> files (link)"):
> > I spent some time on trying to fix it myself but failed because I lacked
> > of time to dive into u-a. I'd like to do some documentation or even
> > several changes to ma
Manuel Prinz writes ("Re: Can anybody *please* fix #220044 - broken slave files
(link)"):
> I spent some time on trying to fix it myself but failed because I lacked
> of time to dive into u-a. I'd like to do some documentation or even
> several changes to make the u-a code more readable, if this w
Hello,
I would like to kindly ask, if any of you guys can please care about
http://bugs.debian.org/220044 (#392440)? This bug has the potential to
break things (which it already does, see the bugs it blocks) and it is
now standing open for more than *4* years, just because nobody seems to
care abo
6 matches
Mail list logo
