On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 03:08:32PM +0200, Johannes Schauer wrote:
> What is the reasoning behind using the libfakeroot/ directory?
I'm not sure. Maybe it was to discourage anyone linking against
libfakeroot.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 10:11:14PM +0200, Yann Dirson wrote:
> Now that I'm looking at it, I realize that the default "make install"
> does install libfakeroot.so directly in $prefix/lib/ - this brings me
> back to the question of why we need to get it out of the standard
> ld.so search path,
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 01:18:08AM +0200, Yann Dirson wrote:
> Hm, I just realized my patch shares a bit defect with the original
> one: the fakeroot script includes the name of the multiarch dir, which
> makes it different for all archs and violates the multiarch principle.
>
> So if we cannot re
Hm, I just realized my patch shares a bit defect with the original
one: the fakeroot script includes the name of the multiarch dir, which
makes it different for all archs and violates the multiarch principle.
So if we cannot rely on the ld.so conf because of the subdirectory, I
guess the only way
It is quite simple, only touches debian/rules, the result passes the
tests when those are not run under fakeroot, and the resulting deb can
build debs.
However, I was not able to build the package as is, it fails when
trying to gzip localized manpages - I had to comment out the gzip call
for my fi
5 matches
Mail list logo
