Bug#833727: emacs24: FTBFS with glibc 2.24

2016-09-05 Thread Aurelien Jarno
On 2016-09-05 14:58, Rob Browning wrote: > Aurelien Jarno writes: > > > Yes, the 0020-Always-define-gmalloc-etc.-in-src-gmalloc.c.patch actually > > comes from upstream commit 4b1436b702d56eedd27a0777fc7232cdfb7ac4f6. > > Ahh, yes, quite close, so I think this may be sufficient: > > Author: W

Bug#833727: emacs24: FTBFS with glibc 2.24

2016-09-05 Thread Rob Browning
Aurelien Jarno writes: > Yes, the 0020-Always-define-gmalloc-etc.-in-src-gmalloc.c.patch actually > comes from upstream commit 4b1436b702d56eedd27a0777fc7232cdfb7ac4f6. Ahh, yes, quite close, so I think this may be sufficient: Author: Wolfgang Jenkner Date: Sat Dec 26 12:12:02 2015 -0800

Bug#833727: emacs24: FTBFS with glibc 2.24

2016-09-05 Thread Aurelien Jarno
On 2016-09-05 12:31, Rob Browning wrote: > Aurelien Jarno writes: > > > The patch i have attached is actually a backport of the above patch. It > > was present in various branches, so I might have backported one with a > > different commit number, but in practice it's the same. > > Assuming you

Bug#833727: emacs24: FTBFS with glibc 2.24

2016-09-05 Thread Rob Browning
Aurelien Jarno writes: > The patch i have attached is actually a backport of the above patch. It > was present in various branches, so I might have backported one with a > different commit number, but in practice it's the same. Assuming you mean the gmalloc patch, do you know if there's a very s

Bug#833727: emacs24: FTBFS with glibc 2.24

2016-09-05 Thread Rob Browning
Aurelien Jarno writes: > On 2016-09-04 19:09, Rob Browning wrote: > The patch i have attached is actually a backport of the above patch. It > was present in various branches, so I might have backported one with a > different commit number, but in practice it's the same. > > The other patch I att

Bug#833727: emacs24: FTBFS with glibc 2.24

2016-09-05 Thread Aurelien Jarno
Hi, On 2016-09-04 19:09, Rob Browning wrote: > Aurelien Jarno writes: > > > Ok, great if you are working on a release. I am not on a hurry > > personally, the package in the archive still works perfectly, the > > problem is just when trying to rebuild it. Given I am the "one" who > > broke that,

Bug#833727: emacs24: FTBFS with glibc 2.24

2016-09-04 Thread Rob Browning
Aurelien Jarno writes: > Ok, great if you are working on a release. I am not on a hurry > personally, the package in the archive still works perfectly, the > problem is just when trying to rebuild it. Given I am the "one" who > broke that, I felt that I have to offer help. I've started looking a

Bug#833727: emacs24: FTBFS with glibc 2.24

2016-09-03 Thread Aurelien Jarno
On 2016-09-03 11:07, Rob Browning wrote: > Aurelien Jarno writes: > > > glibc 2.24 is now in unstable, so I am upgrading the severity of this > > bug to serious. If you don't have time to fix this bug, I can do a > > non-maintainer upload with the patch which is in the bug log. > > I've been wor

Bug#833727: emacs24: FTBFS with glibc 2.24

2016-09-03 Thread Rob Browning
Aurelien Jarno writes: > glibc 2.24 is now in unstable, so I am upgrading the severity of this > bug to serious. If you don't have time to fix this bug, I can do a > non-maintainer upload with the patch which is in the bug log. I've been working on a release, and I think I should have time to fi

Processed: Bug#833727: emacs24: FTBFS with glibc 2.24

2016-09-02 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > severity -1 serious Bug #833727 [emacs24] emacs24: FTBFS with glibc 2.24 Severity set to 'serious' from 'important' -- 833727: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=833727 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems