*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 96099 ***

This wasn't meant as a personal insult. If we end up w/ the same bug
report twice, we choose the one w/ the most information, the first one
we see, the one that already has duplicates, or we draw lots and
consult a psychic. Marking bugs as duplicates is our way of
controlling the work flow of bugs coming in, and not a way of passing
judgment upon the reporters.

I'm sorry if it came across that way.

On 3/26/07, rlpw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> *** This bug is a duplicate of bug 96099 ***
>
> I do not make duplicates. If you read the time stamp my report came out four
> hours before the other.
>
> On 3/26/07, Vijnana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > *** This bug is a duplicate of bug 96099 ***
> >
> > ** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 96099
> >    linux-image-2.6.20-13 is available but
> > linux-restricted-modules-2.6.20-13 is not available
> >
> > --
> > nvidia-glx incompatable with image 2.6.20-13.21
> > https://launchpad.net/bugs/96007
> >
>
> --
> nvidia-glx incompatable with image 2.6.20-13.21
> https://launchpad.net/bugs/96007
>


-- 
Anybody who tells me I can't use a program because it's not open
source, go suck on rms. I'm not interested. 99% of that I run tends to
be open source, but that's _my_ choice, dammit.

-- Linus Torvalds

-- 
nvidia-glx incompatable with image 2.6.20-13.21
https://launchpad.net/bugs/96007

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to