On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 18:07, David Kalnischkies
wrote:
> It seems to be indeed the way the sha256 and sha512 checksums are
> calculated. To make it a bit obscure: we have a testcase checking them
> and they run successfully producing the correct output.
> (for reference: test/libapt/hashsums_tes
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 00:22, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> I guess you're not a DD, and so don't have access to the porter
> machines?
Correct guess, but I am adventures enough to work around it:
I had a lot of fun today trying to compile apt=0.9.1 in a qemu-sparc
debian etch image from aurel32 [0]. Too
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 12:12:22AM +0200, David Kalnischkies wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 22:41, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > apt-get update now results in this on sparc:
> > Get:1 http://debian.carnet.hr unstable InRelease [208 kB]
> > E: Method http has died unexpectedly!
> > E: Sub-process http r
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 22:41, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> apt-get update now results in this on sparc:
> Get:1 http://debian.carnet.hr unstable InRelease [208 kB]
> E: Method http has died unexpectedly!
> E: Sub-process http received signal 10.
Any trace?
Which version was it which worked last?
Could y
Package: apt
Version: 0.9.0
Severity: serious
Hi,
apt-get update now results in this on sparc:
Get:1 http://debian.carnet.hr unstable InRelease [208 kB]
E: Method http has died unexpectedly!
E: Sub-process http received signal 10.
Kurt
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@
5 matches
Mail list logo