[arch-dev-public] [signoff] pacman 3.1.0
Signoff email for pacman 3.1.0, both architectures. I've tested it for i686, not as much for x86_64. NOTE: this is a signoff email only, and deals with the *packaging* and not the *application*. This is NOT the place for bugs, issues, etc. Please start a new thread either here or on pacman-dev, or file a bug report. Thank you. Travis- do you want to start a signoff for abs? If so, you have an i686 signoff from me. -Dan
On Jan 9, 2008 10:21 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
Signoff email for pacman 3.1.0, both architectures.
I've tested it for i686, not as much for x86_64.
NOTE: this is a signoff email only, and deals with the *packaging* and not the *application*. This is NOT the place for bugs, issues, etc. Please start a new thread either here or on pacman-dev, or file a bug report. Thank you.
Seems OK to me. Signoff, i686
Travis- do you want to start a signoff for abs? If so, you have an i686 signoff from me.
Yeah, I do. Thread started - thanks for the reminder.
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008, Travis Willard wrote:
On Jan 9, 2008 10:21 PM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
Signoff email for pacman 3.1.0, both architectures.
I've tested it for i686, not as much for x86_64.
NOTE: this is a signoff email only, and deals with the *packaging* and not the *application*. This is NOT the place for bugs, issues, etc. Please start a new thread either here or on pacman-dev, or file a bug report. Thank you.
Seems OK to me. Signoff, i686
Works fine here. Signoff for both arches. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
Thursday 10 January 2008, Dan McGee wrote: | Signoff email for pacman 3.1.0, both architectures. | | I've tested it for i686, not as much for x86_64. singing in the rain for x86_64 looks great, - D -- .·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´ ° ° ° ° ° ° ><((((º> ° ° ° ° ° <º)))>< <º)))><
Dan McGee schrieb:
Signoff email for pacman 3.1.0, both architectures.
I've tested it for i686, not as much for x86_64.
Signoff for both, upgrade path seems fine.
On Jan 10, 2008 7:26 AM, Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
Dan McGee schrieb:
Signoff email for pacman 3.1.0, both architectures.
I've tested it for i686, not as much for x86_64.
Signoff for both, upgrade path seems fine.
Signed off i686, didn't fully test on x86_64 (but Dan you have sudo rights, so I'd imagine that signoff would be the same)
On Jan 10, 2008 8:51 AM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
Signoff email for pacman 3.1.0, both architectures.
Signed off, x86_64
Am Donnerstag, 10. Januar 2008 04:21:21 schrieb Dan McGee:
Signoff email for pacman 3.1.0, both architectures.
signoff (both). I have tested pacman itself and makepkg; no problems so far. -- archlinux.de
Am Samstag, 12. Januar 2008 schrieb Pierre Schmitz:
Am Donnerstag, 10. Januar 2008 04:21:21 schrieb Dan McGee:
Signoff email for pacman 3.1.0, both architectures.
signoff (both). I have tested pacman itself and makepkg; no problems so far.
signoff for both arches worked so far, good job dan :) greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa@archlinux.org
participants (9)
-
Aaron Griffin
-
Damir Perisa
-
Dan McGee
-
Eric Belanger
-
Pierre Schmitz
-
Thomas Bächler
-
Tobias Powalowski
-
Travis Willard
-
Varun Acharya