Bug#119164: marked as done (quik: Newest version of quik is installing bootstrap manpage again.)
Your message dated 26 Dec 2001 22:12:15 +0100
with message-id <873d1x7kk0.fsf@public.srce.hr>
and subject line Fixed in quik 2.0e-0.6
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 responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 11 Nov 2001 19:24:52 +0000
>From tibbetts@mit.edu Sun Nov 11 13:24:52 2001
Return-path: <tibbetts@mit.edu>
Received: from stratton-two-seventy-eight.mit.edu (descartes) [18.187.6.23] (mail)
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 1630Ds-0005Bc-00; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 13:24:52 -0600
Received: from tibbetts by descartes with local (Exim 3.32 #1 (Debian))
id 1630Dr-0001mC-00; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 14:24:51 -0500
From: Richard Tibbetts <tibbetts@mit.edu>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: quik: Newest version of quik is installing bootstrap manpage again.
X-Reportbug-Version: 1.35
X-Mailer: reportbug 1.35
Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 14:24:51 -0500
Message-Id: <E1630Dr-0001mC-00@descartes>
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Package: quik
Version: 2.0e-0.5
Severity: normal
Tags: patch
The newest version of quik is installing bootstrap.8 manpage, which is
owned by yaboot. This is a recurrence of an old bug. Here is a trivial
patch to fix it, though it might be wrong (I am a bit new to debian
packaging):
--- Makefile.orig Fri Mar 10 15:59:28 2000
+++ Makefile Sun Nov 11 14:14:35 2001
@@ -16,4 +16,4 @@
if [ -f $(DESTDIR)/etc/quik.conf ]; then :; \
else set -x; install -m 644 etc/quik.conf $(DESTDIR)/etc; fi
install -m 444 man/quik.conf.5 $(DESTDIR)/usr/man/man5
- install -m 444 man/quik.8 man/bootstrap.8 $(DESTDIR)/usr/man/man8
+ install -m 444 man/quik.8 $(DESTDIR)/usr/man/man8
-- System Information
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: powerpc
Kernel: Linux descartes 2.4.14-ben0 #1 Thu Nov 8 09:41:42 EST 2001 ppc
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 119164-done) by bugs.debian.org; 26 Dec 2001 21:02:16 +0000
>From mvela@public.srce.hr Wed Dec 26 15:02:16 2001
Return-path: <mvela@public.srce.hr>
Received: from jagor.srce.hr [161.53.2.130] (root)
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 16JLBn-0008Ep-00; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 15:02:16 -0600
Received: (from root@localhost)
by jagor.srce.hr (8.9.3/8.9.3) id VAA03609
for 119164-done@bugs.debian.org; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 21:59:23 +0100 (MET)
Received: from fuzz (asy105.cmu.carnet.hr [193.198.128.105])
by jagor.srce.hr (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA03486
for <119164-done@bugs.debian.org>; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 21:59:14 +0100 (MET)
Received: from mvela by fuzz with local (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian))
id 16JLLU-0007ei-00
for <119164-done@bugs.debian.org>; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 22:12:16 +0100
From: Matej Vela <vela@debian.org>
To: 119164-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Fixed in quik 2.0e-0.6
Date: 26 Dec 2001 22:12:15 +0100
Message-ID: <873d1x7kk0.fsf@public.srce.hr>
Lines: 14
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: Matej Vela <mvela@public.srce.hr>
X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS perl-11
Delivered-To: 119164-done@bugs.debian.org
Now that quik is orphaned, bugs fixed by non-maintainer uploads can be
closed.
Here is the relevant changelog entry:
quik (2.0e-0.6) unstable; urgency=low
* NMU
* Potato version is newer than current woody version, and has the
bootstrap.8 man page, which conflicts with yaboot's bootstrap.8. So
just bump this version, and don't include that man page
(Closes: #119164).
-- Colin Walters <walters@debian.org> Mon, 26 Nov 2001 00:01:52 -0500
Reply to: