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

Bug#848079: marked as done (nmu: libcrypt-openssl-bignum-perl_0.07-1)



Your message dated Thu, 15 Dec 2016 16:36:00 +0000
with message-id <4eed0dc9-e59f-5b9e-401e-05e8191d333a@thykier.net>
and subject line Re: Bug#848079: nmu: libcrypt-openssl-bignum-perl_0.07-1
has caused the Debian Bug report #848079,
regarding nmu: libcrypt-openssl-bignum-perl_0.07-1
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 this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
848079: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=848079
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: release.debian.org
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: binnmu
Severity: normal

nmu libcrypt-openssl-bignum-perl_0.07-1 . ANY . unstable . -m "rebuild against openssl 1.1.0"

This NMU should pickup libssl1.1 instead 1.0.2 which is it currently
linked against. Once this binNMU is done, a give-back on mips64el of
libcrypt-openssl-rsa-perl should be done and the package should build
then (it did so on the porterbox).

I have no idea why it worked on !mips64el, it shouldn't :)

Sebastian

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior:
> Package: release.debian.org
> User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
> Usertags: binnmu
> Severity: normal
> 
> nmu libcrypt-openssl-bignum-perl_0.07-1 . ANY . unstable . -m "rebuild against openssl 1.1.0"
> 
> This NMU should pickup libssl1.1 instead 1.0.2 which is it currently
> linked against. Once this binNMU is done, a give-back on mips64el of
> libcrypt-openssl-rsa-perl should be done and the package should build
> then (it did so on the porterbox).
> 
> I have no idea why it worked on !mips64el, it shouldn't :)
> 
> Sebastian
> 

Scheduled (incl. the give-back with a dep-wait), thanks.

~Niels

--- End Message ---

Reply to: