Your message dated Tue, 1 Aug 2000 19:08:15 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line submitter claims it is fixed
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your respon
Ben,
The binary (from Debian 2.0) that crashed with libc6_2.1.1-12 works
with libc6_2.1.3-10.
The problem seems to have disappeared.
Kind regards,
- John
On Sun, 30 Jul 2000, Ben Collins wrote:
> Does this problem still exist? I have not seen any sign of it, so if it
> has gone (because of gl
Your message dated Tue, 1 Aug 2000 19:08:15 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line submitter claims it is fixed
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your respo
Ben,
The binary (from Debian 2.0) that crashed with libc6_2.1.1-12 works
with libc6_2.1.3-10.
The problem seems to have disappeared.
Kind regards,
- John
On Sun, 30 Jul 2000, Ben Collins wrote:
> Does this problem still exist? I have not seen any sign of it, so if it
> has gone (because of g
4 matches
Mail list logo