[Ccing d-alpha now] * Mike Hommey (m...@glandium.org) [090719 09:22]: > On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 10:56:09AM +0200, Paul Wise wrote: > > On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 07:27 +0200, Luk Claes wrote: > > > > > Just given back on alpha. Lets see if it helps. > > > > Doesn't look like it did. The version in experimental seems to build on > > alpha though: > > > > http://experimental.debian.net/fetch.php?&pkg=xulrunner&ver=1.9.1.1-1&arch=alpha&stamp=1247941851&file=log&as=raw > > But the previous version, 1.9.1-1, failed, and there is really no > difference in 1.9.1.1-1 that would explain that. > > On the other hand, 1.9.1-1 was built with: > Toolchain package versions: libc6.1-dev_2.9-13 g++-4.3_4.3.3-13 > gcc-4.3_4.3.3-13 binutils_2.19.1-1 libstdc++6_4.4.0-10 > libstdc++6-4.3-dev_4.3.3-13 > > while 1.9.1.1-1 was built with: > Toolchain package versions: libc6.1-dev_2.9-13 g++-4.3_4.3.3-14 > gcc-4.3_4.3.3-14 binutils_2.19.1-1 libstdc++6_4.4.0-11 > libstdc++6-4.3-dev_4.3.3-14 > > Maybe this made the difference.
Any news on this bug report? Alpha-porters, could you perhaps help here? Cheers, Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
