> On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 06:28:50AM +0300, Lasse Karkkainen wrote:
> > Other platforms aren't nearly as significant as i386 (not many users, no
> > much new hardware).
>
> You're arrogance makes me wonder if George W. Bush is related to you.
Hehehehee...
Lasse, I guess if the other platforms
On Mon, 30 Apr 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Unfortunately it seems that a kernel that supports both i386 and SMP
> would have to use very slow methods for locking since instructions
> allowing faster locking only came in with the 486 and above.
I'm wondering when this whole discussion will in
On Tue, 19 Dec 2000, Josh Huber wrote:
> built. Should I just do it myself? I also know that there's no
> (automated :) autobuilder for Alpha, so I understand that there might
> be some delay for alpha.
In Alpha's case, I'm normally very "on-top" of the builds, but am going to
be slow for the
On 13 Sep 2000, James Troup wrote:
> Actually, no, way less than half the current backlog are applicants
> from the shut down period.
Yeah, after looking at more of the records, I see this.
> If that's all I had to do in my life, no, of course it wouldn't.
> Unfortunately it's not. Granted, DA
On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, Raul Miller wrote:
> [2] New Maintainer is a tough job, with a lot of work to be done
> (especially because we weren't processing applications at all, last
> year, because things had gotten so out of hand and the people dealing
> with it had gotten so stressed out). In spite
On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, Nils Rennebarth wrote:
> On
>http://www.suse.de/~aj/linux_lfs.html
> I read that for glibc 2.1.3 in order to support large files it needs to be
> compiled against headers from a 2.4 kernel. As this is currently not the
> case, glibc 2.1.3 should be rebuilt.
Woody is sho
On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, erik wrote:
> Thank you for a cool response - I was really hoping that would eventually
> happen. I realize I stirred up a hornets nest; I did it intentionally
> because otherwise nobody seems to notice and I think that at least some of
> what I originally wrote (goading asi
On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, erik wrote:
> > Yep, I do -and it worked great before he had to repackage it. You could
> > have simply copied them from tdyc and had done with it.
Ok, this is where I have to voice my opinion as well...
First off, the packages WILL NOT build on Alpha (and possibly other
a
On Fri, 8 Sep 2000, Ivan E. Moore II wrote:
> Yup...I hosed the rules script and had a $(QTDIR)/libs instead of a
> $(QTDIR)/lib
Yeah, that'll do it :-P I'll double-check this on my end and see if
changing that will fix compilation here. If so, I'll upload this version
since you'll be superce
specially since
it requires qt2.2 to be installed before compiling (a build dependency on
itself if it remains lumped in with the qt2.2 source package).
I'm cc'ing the maintainer in hopes that we can resolve this without filing
a bug at this time.
C
On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, Christopher C. Ch
Looks like i spoke too soon. The qt2.2-2.2.0-2906 package that was
installed into master today dies during compile (despite working around
the optimiser bug...there's something going wrong with the build procedure
I believe). I'll be filing a bug against qt2.2 once I figure out what's
going
On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, Eray Ozkural wrote:
> Yep, I ITP'ed sourcenav and insight.. a _minor_ problem with
> the tcl/tk stuff, but I think I'll just wrap it up soon.
Fantastic. I emailed you off-list about some ideas on how to handle that,
in case you needed the tips (doubt you will, but just in ca
On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, Ullrich Martini wrote:
> I am trying to compile qt 2.2 on a alpha with potato, g++ 2.95.2-13
> using rkrustys patches from the
> intel qt 2.2 diffs. I get lots of internal compiler errors on the files
> generated by moc (moc_*.cpp), and
> uic segfaults when compiling tools/d
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Adrian Bunk wrote:
>Source-Navigator works with the Insight GUI interface for GDB.
Speaking of which, has anyone packaged Insight? If not, I'll look into it
(not ITP yet... :-P)
C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble?
It can now be maintained on alpha, IIRC. I looked into it awhile ago and
they had brought it up to date with a modern gcc (so long 2.7.x, which
didn't work on alpha unless severely patched).
C
On 31 Aug 2000, John Goerzen wrote:
> At the time, it would build only on i386. I don't know if this
I had the same problem...I had to manually edit the messages after
reading them.
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn wrote:
> Package: imap
> Version: 4.7c-1
>
> (Juhapekka Tolvanen's messages may be found on these mailing lists:
> debian-devel@lists.debian.org,debian-legal@lists.debi
Rob Tillotson wrote:
>
> I just tried rebuilding pilot-link, after making the changes in
> debian/rules suggested in the BTS entry (changing all "egcc" to
> "gcc"), and could not reproduce the bug.
Ok...I fixed this one and am uploading it shortly (NMU binary with
patches going to BTS). The rule
Rob Tillotson wrote:
>
> I just tried rebuilding pilot-link, after making the changes in
> debian/rules suggested in the BTS entry (changing all "egcc" to
> "gcc"), and could not reproduce the bug.
The bug is really for potato and is Alpha-based (again). I'll look into
this one now as well. It
Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> > wu-ftpd-academ30931 wu-ftpd-academ: Can't build from source!
>
> I have compiled wu-ftpd-academ from source on saens at least 10 times, I
> did not get the problems described in the bug.
The problem seemed to be Alpha-related. I tried unsuccessfully to port
the
Paul Slootman wrote:
>
> The last time I tried (about 10 sec. ago, on a.d.nl :-):
>
> make[2]: Entering directory `/extra/home/debian/psl/kernel/linux/drivers/net'
> gcc -D__KERNEL__ -I/extra/home/debian/psl/kernel/linux/include -Wall
> -Wstrict-prototypes -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-strength-
On Wed, 14 Oct 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> There is one, MAJOR, huge, massive, 'program' which egcs will not
> properly compile, this is the kernel, 2.0.x is officially not going to
> operate 100% correctly when compiled with gcc 2.8.x or egcs..
>
> Any suggestions?
On the Alpha? I've had
Buddha Buck wrote:
>
> How does that differ from -any- binary-only NMU, regardless of
> architechture? If binary-only NMU's for i386 are bad, why are
> binary-only NMUs for m68k OK?
>
> The only -real- problem I see with normal NMUs is that then the i386
> and m68k binaries are built from differ
On Wed, 14 Oct 1998, Brian White wrote:
> Probably 4-6 weeks. I'd like to ship it before the end of November.
Fantastic!
> Guy, is there any problem with freezing the alpha architecture some time
> after the main freeze?
About the only thing I'm really concerned with is egcs. As much as I ha
On Wed, 14 Oct 1998, Brian White wrote:
> Could I get some official word on which architectures wish to be included
> in the 2.1 release of Debian? Thanks!
So far, Alpha is looking "near" ready and we are shooting to release with
slink/i386. A caveat, however, is that we need to resolve some b
After some discussion with Galen, I'm taking over the binutils package
altogether. Hopefully, I can resolve some of the long-outstanding bugs
(already think I can knock a few of them out of existance).
Thanks...
Chris
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>
> The perl package is in incoming. So here is the list of the 33 packages that
> need to be updated. The maintainers are listed. The list corresponds to
> package which contains filenames matching "/usr/lib/perl5.*\.so".
FYI, this package doesn't build properly on the Alp
On 19 Jun 1998, Douglas Bates wrote:
> On a Digital Unix system it does nothing because the program dies as
> soon as it starts up. On other systems you get several .Rout files
> and one great gronking .ps file from the graphics. Take a look at it
> under gv or something similar. If you get th
On 19 Jun 1998, Douglas Bates wrote:
> On a Digital Unix system it does nothing because the program dies as
> soon as it starts up. On other systems you get several .Rout files
> and one great gronking .ps file from the graphics. Take a look at it
> under gv or something similar. If you get th
On 19 Jun 1998, Douglas Bates wrote:
> I am the maintainer of the r-base package which provides a language
> for statistical computing and graphics. I am also on the development
> team for the upstream sources. We recently released R-0.62.1 which I
> packaged it up for slink (it was too late fo
Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
>
> editor.exe is the only editor that you can count on being there if all else
> fails and it's absence or replacement would be VERY notable to those who
> expect editor.exe
> lets do a ratio of dos/win* users that will install linux,
> and unix users that will install l
On Wed, 10 Jun 1998, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> If vi would fit on the rescue disk, do you think we would be discussing
> ae?
I guess not, then...
> To be able to do an install with the rescue disk the space priorities
> don't allow anything but ae in that environment. When you can get vi's
> binary
Philip Hands wrote:
>
> Please don't do this. It used to drive me nuts to type vi and get ae (whether
> in ae or braindamaged-vi mode). If there is some vital reason for removing
> vi, it should be replaced with a script that says something along the lines
> of:
>
> VI is missing from this r
Paul Slootman wrote:
> There's been a lot of porting going on for Alpha, however, I can't
> really say that the number of packages that need to be ported to Alpha
> has been decreasing since the freeze; every time 20 packages are
> uploaded for Alpha, there are 22 new packages for i386 :-(
I
Kamel SEHIL wrote:
>
> hi people i want to know if an DEC ALPHA (beta or less) is avaible
> for now i install red-hat5 , but i'm an debian user's (free software)
> and red-hat is not really stable
Actually, yes, Debian has a stable port for the Alpha. Right now, it's
still considered technically
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Mon, 15 Dec 1997, Santiago Vila wrote:
> Please, tell Brian White about this.
Will do. Thanks!
> Current maintainer for bibindex in
> hamm is "Debian-QA Group", so you should not receive any message about
> that because of bibindex.
Yeah, looking back th
h the nags (I'm ignoring them actually), but I
just wanted to tell whomever I needed to about this :)
Thanks :)
Chris
------
Christopher C. Chimelis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Systems Supervisor
Division of Biomedical Communicati
Adrian Bridgett wrote:
>
> Ah, on re-reading my first sentence, I think I should have added "in theory"
> :-) I agree with your point that having hundreds of symlinks from
> binary-i586 to binary-i386 allows us to use the current tools with very
> little changes.
FYI, we may have the same problem
37 matches
Mail list logo
