Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 198960 - remove media-video/m2vrequantizer-20060306
Summary: remove media-video/m2vrequantizer-20060306
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: New packages (show other bugs)
Hardware: x86 Linux
: High enhancement (vote)
Assignee: Gentoo VDR Project
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2007-11-12 18:23 UTC by Henning Ryll
Modified: 2011-01-23 00:00 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Henning Ryll 2007-11-12 18:23:56 UTC
vdr-burn should depend on m2vrequantizer-0.0.1 not the older (unstable) 2006xxx version.

Reproducible: Always
Comment 1 Jakub Moc (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2007-11-12 18:49:16 UTC
(In reply to comment #0)
> vdr-burn should depend on m2vrequantizer-0.0.1 not the older (unstable) 2006xxx
> version.

Yeah, that will produce exactly nothing useful because 20060306 > 0.0.1, unfortunately. 
Comment 2 Matthias Schwarzott gentoo-dev 2008-04-15 10:41:53 UTC
Removed it!
Comment 3 Matthias Schwarzott gentoo-dev 2008-04-15 11:55:38 UTC
Should not have removed this (20060306) version - it is newer than 0.0.1 (internally labled 20030925).
Readded the file for now.

So my impression is: 2006xxxx is newer than 0.0.1, and not older!
Comment 4 Jeremy Olexa (darkside) (RETIRED) archtester gentoo-dev Security 2009-05-30 01:38:09 UTC
(In reply to comment #3)
> Should not have removed this (20060306) version - it is newer than 0.0.1
> (internally labled 20030925).
> Readded the file for now.
> 
> So my impression is: 2006xxxx is newer than 0.0.1, and not older!
> 

This bug is invalid then.
Comment 5 Jeremy Olexa (darkside) (RETIRED) archtester gentoo-dev Security 2009-08-01 00:15:07 UTC
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > Should not have removed this (20060306) version - it is newer than 0.0.1
> > (internally labled 20030925).
> > Readded the file for now.
> > 
> > So my impression is: 2006xxxx is newer than 0.0.1, and not older!
> > 
> 
> This bug is invalid then.
> 

Why did this bug get reopened without a comment? What needs to be done here?
Comment 6 Joerg Bornkessel (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2011-01-23 00:00:08 UTC
dirty fix :(

moved 20060306 to 0.0.2_pre20060306

ebuilds are now in the correkt timeline