[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

packages for 3.0r2




hi

for some reason, it seems that auto-builders are not catching up
on my packages for woody-proposed-updates

here are the autobuilders logs:

snmpkit

    *  0.9-4.woody.2 (s390) (latest build at Sep 18 17:01: maybe-successful)
    * 0.9-4.woody.2 (hppa) (latest build at Sep 18 17:04: maybe-successful)
    * 0.9-4.woody.2 (alpha) (latest build at Sep 18 17:05: maybe-successful)
    * 0.9-4.woody.2 (ia64) (latest build at Nov 13 17:46: maybe-successful)
    * 0.9-4.woody.2 (i386) (latest build at Sep 18 17:12: maybe-successful)
    * 0.9-4.woody.2 (powerpc) (latest build at Sep 18 17:08: maybe-successful)
    * 0.9-4.woody.2 (arm) (latest build at Sep 19 17:01: maybe-successful)
    * 0.9-4.woody.2 (m68k) (latest build at Sep 18 20:06: maybe-successful)
    * 0.9-4.woody.2 (mips) (latest build at Sep 19 06:31: maybe-successful)
    * 0.9-4.woody.2 (mipsel) (latest build at Sep 19 08:42: maybe-successful)

libprinterconf

    *  0.5-4.woody.2 (s390) (latest build at Nov 3 13:52: maybe-successful)
    * 0.5-4.woody.2 (ia64) (latest build at Nov 13 17:47: maybe-successful)
    * 0.5-4.woody.2 (arm) (latest build at Nov 3 12:40: maybe-successful)
    * 0.5-4.woody.2 (m68k) (latest build at Sep 18 20:36: maybe-successful)
    * 0.5-4.woody.2 (alpha) (latest build at Sep 19 21:52: maybe-successful)
    * 0.5-4.woody.2 (mips) (latest build at Sep 19 21:52: maybe-successful)
    * 0.5-4.woody.2 (i386) (latest build at Sep 19 21:56: maybe-successful)
    * 0.5-4.woody.2 (hppa) (latest build at Sep 19 22:18: maybe-successful)
    * 0.5-4.woody.2 (powerpc) (latest build at Sep 19 21:57: maybe-successful)
    * 0.5-4.woody.2 (mipsel) (latest build at Sep 20 13:33: maybe-successful)

I would like for these packages to be in Debian 3.0r2

what should I do? should I re-upload?

thanks

a.


-- 
Andrea Mennucc
 "E' un mondo difficile. Che vita intensa!" (Tonino Carotone)

Attachment: pgpFLtPwafZMV.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: