Steve Langasek wrote: >> On hppa, the package FTBFS due to code errors.
hppa is, hopefully, fixed with the latest upload. > All three of these failures (and now sparc) are caused by the per-flavor > modules not being available under the names the build is looking for. It > has nothing to do with 64-bit support: first of all, there is no such > *thing* as a 32-bit ia64 system, the architecture is natively 64-bit, and > second, any of these archs should be able to build modules for 64-bit i didn't say that there is a 32bit ia64 system.. but are itanium system able to build binaries for itanium2 (mckinley) systems? > So this is very much not an architecture bug to sort out, this is a bug in > either unionfs or whatever tools it's using for building the modules. Since > other module packages aren't reporting the same problem, it looks like a > unionfs bug to me. if i build the modules at home on my sparc64 and powerpc64 machine, they build fine. as myon told me, there could be something wrong with the 'domain exec'. need to look into that.. -- Address: Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562 Biberist Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet: http://people.panthera-systems.net/~daniel-baumann/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
