On Thu, Sep 03, 2009 at 04:16:57PM +0200, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> * Lionel Elie Mamane [081119 00:55 +0100]
>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 07:47:05PM +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
>>> * Lionel Elie Mamane [08 12:30 +0100]
Usually, a cleaner solution is using AM_MAINTAINER_MODE; you see
* Lionel Elie Mamane [081119 00:55 +0100]
> tags 505088 +patch
> thanks
>
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 07:47:05PM +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> > * Lionel Elie Mamane [08 12:30 +0100]
>
> >> Usually, a cleaner solution is using AM_MAINTAINER_MODE; you seem to
> >> patch it into configure.ac
* Lionel Elie Mamane [08 12:30 +0100]
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 06:59:08PM +0100, Jordi Mallach wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 09:40:33AM +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
>
> >> My best shot is nanosecond timestamps; you would be using ext3? That
> >> has timestamps to the precision of a s
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 06:59:08PM +0100, Jordi Mallach wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 09:40:33AM +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
>> My best shot is nanosecond timestamps; you would be using ext3? That
>> has timestamps to the precision of a second. I use XFS, which has
>> timestamps to the pre
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 09:40:33AM +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> My best shot is nanosecond timestamps; you would be using ext3? That
> has timestamps to the precision of a second. I use XFS, which has
> timestamps to the precision of a nanosecond. So, while aclocal.m4 is
> newer than configur
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 12:38:46AM +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> * Lionel Elie Mamane [081110 00:30 +0100]
>> On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 11:22:05PM +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
Do you have autoconf/automake/libtool installed in the environment
where you run it?
>>> Yes
* Lionel Elie Mamane [081110 00:30 +0100]
> On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 11:22:05PM +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
>
> >> Do you have autoconf/automake/libtool installed in the environment
> >> where you run it?
>
> > Yes
>
> Is it actually run during the build?
>
> >>> Why?
>
>
>>> Do you have autoconf/automake/libtool installed in the environment
>>> where you run it?
>> Yes
> Is it actually run during the build?
Why?
>>> Well, because on my system it is being run, which is the root of
>>> the problem, as explained in a previous email. autoconf b
On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 11:22:05PM +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
>> Do you have autoconf/automake/libtool installed in the environment
>> where you run it?
> Yes
Is it actually run during the build?
>>> Why?
>> Well, because on my system it is being run, which is the root o
* Lionel Elie Mamane [081109 22:50 +0100]
> On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 10:33:39PM +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> > * Lionel Elie Mamane [081109 22:10 +0100]
> >> On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 10:07:22PM +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> >>> * Lionel Elie Mamane [081109 21:50 +0100]
> On Sun, Nov 0
* Lionel Elie Mamane [081109 22:10 +0100]
> On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 10:07:22PM +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> > * Lionel Elie Mamane [081109 21:50 +0100]
> >> On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 08:53:52PM +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> >>> * Lionel Elie Mamane [081109 15:10 +0100]
> On Sun, Nov 0
On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 10:33:39PM +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> * Lionel Elie Mamane [081109 22:10 +0100]
>> On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 10:07:22PM +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
>>> * Lionel Elie Mamane [081109 21:50 +0100]
On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 08:53:52PM +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrot
On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 10:07:22PM +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> * Lionel Elie Mamane [081109 21:50 +0100]
>> On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 08:53:52PM +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
>>> * Lionel Elie Mamane [081109 15:10 +0100]
On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 02:29:58PM +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrot
* Lionel Elie Mamane [081109 21:50 +0100]
> On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 08:53:52PM +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> > * Lionel Elie Mamane [081109 15:10 +0100]
> >> On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 02:29:58PM +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
>
> >>> This runs fine here. So I don't know how to reproduce?
>
>
On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 08:53:52PM +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> * Lionel Elie Mamane [081109 15:10 +0100]
>> On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 02:29:58PM +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
>>> This runs fine here. So I don't know how to reproduce?
>> Does it run fine when run *twice*?
> Yes.
Do you h
* Lionel Elie Mamane [081109 15:10 +0100]
> On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 02:29:58PM +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
[...]
> > This runs fine here. So I don't know how to reproduce?
>
> Does it run fine when run *twice*?
Yes.
Elimar
--
>what IMHO then?
IMHO - Inhalation of a Multi-leafed Herb
On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 02:29:58PM +0100, Elimar Riesebieter wrote:
> * Lionel Elie Mamane [081109 11:30 +0100]
>> Package: alsa-lib
>> Version: 1.0.18-1
>> Severity: serious
>> Justification: lenny release goal
> No, 1.0.18 isn't tagged to went into Lenny!
I never said it was supposed to go int
tags 505088 unreproducible
severity 505088 minor
thanks
* Lionel Elie Mamane [081109 11:30 +0100]
> Package: alsa-lib
> Version: 1.0.18-1
> Severity: serious
> Justification: lenny release goal
No, 1.0.18 isn't tagged to went into Lenny!
> User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Usertags: qa-doublebuild
>
>
Package: alsa-lib
Version: 1.0.18-1
Severity: serious
Justification: lenny release goal
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Usertags: qa-doublebuild
Second build:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/j/alsa-lib-1.0.18 0 $ debuild -us -uc -b
dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -D -us -uc -b
dpkg-buildpackage: set CFLAGS to default
19 matches
Mail list logo
