Sorry for re-triggering an old thread,
On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 21:07:29 +0100, David Paleino wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 16:49:33 +0100, Evgeni Golov wrote:
>
> > [..]
> > David, is there any chance that libx86 will be updated someday? Esp
> > because upstream of v86d has an updated 0.10 in his git a
Hi David,
On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 21:07:29 +0100 David Paleino wrote:
> I prepared a package with an updated LRMI:
>
> http://alioth.debian.org/~hanska-guest/apt/unstable/libx86_1.1+ds1-3.dsc
>
> All the people involved: would you please testbuild your packages against it?
> Thank you.
Sorry that I
Hi!
On Sun, 2009-03-08 at 16:49:33 +0100, Evgeni Golov wrote:
> dear maintainers of packages that contain lrmi.{c,h},
>
> today Lucas has reported #518725 - atitvout FTBFS because of missing
> *_MASK defines.
> Seeing that bug and remembering fun with lrmi myself, I thought I can
> have a look ho
On Sun, Mar 08, 2009 at 09:07:29PM +0100, David Paleino wrote:
> Matthew: since you're libx86 upstream, you might be interested in the contents
> of debian/patches, I'll remove those as soon as you release a new version
> (also, please drop debian/ from upstream tarballs)
Thanks, I'll take a look
On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 20:34:12 +0100, Evgeni Golov wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 19:24:22 +0100 David Paleino wrote:
>
> > [.. regarding libx86 ..]
>
> May I throw in the fact that one sometimes wants x86emu on i386?
Yes, I *do* remember your bugreport about it ;) (apropos: sorry if I didn't
even re
On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 16:49:33 +0100, Evgeni Golov wrote:
> [..]
> David, is there any chance that libx86 will be updated someday? Esp
> because upstream of v86d has an updated 0.10 in his git at
> http://repo.or.cz/w/v86d.git and Debian's v86d is not using it in
> favour of not build duplicate code.
On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 19:24:22 +0100 David Paleino wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 19:19:47 +0100, David Paleino wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 18:12:01 +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >
> > > David Paleino wrote:
> > >
> > > >I'll start work on liblrmi (i.e. ITP, making it, buildtesting relevant
>
On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 19:19:47 +0100, David Paleino wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 18:12:01 +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>
> > David Paleino wrote:
> >
> > >I'll start work on liblrmi (i.e. ITP, making it, buildtesting relevant
> > >packages, [..]) if some interest is shown.
> >
> > I'm not sure w
Please don't break threads ;)
On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 18:12:01 +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> David Paleino wrote:
>
> >I'll start work on liblrmi (i.e. ITP, making it, buildtesting relevant
> >packages, [..]) if some interest is shown.
>
> I'm not sure what the benefit would be over libx86?
IMV
David Paleino wrote:
>I'll start work on liblrmi (i.e. ITP, making it, buildtesting relevant
>packages, [..]) if some interest is shown.
I'm not sure what the benefit would be over libx86? liblrmi would leave
you stuck with x86, whereas using libx86 means that much of the code
will also work o
Evgeni Golov wrote:
>On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 17:17:44 + Matthew Garrett wrote:
>
>> >All other (incl David), is there any interest in forking libx86 and
>> >using it globally instead of fixing that ftbfs 7 times?
>>
>> You could just send a patch to libx86 upstream, you know...
>
>The patch for w
On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 16:49:33 +0100, Evgeni Golov wrote:
> Dear debian-devel,
> dear maintainers of packages that contain lrmi.{c,h},
Hello Evgeni,
thanks for this heads up.
> [..]
> The following packages contain lrmi.{c,h}, [..]
> But actually we should stop duplicating code (esp. OLD code - som
On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 17:17:44 + Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >All other (incl David), is there any interest in forking libx86 and
> >using it globally instead of fixing that ftbfs 7 times?
>
> You could just send a patch to libx86 upstream, you know...
The patch for what?
For the *_MASK defines F
Evgeni Golov wrote:
>All other (incl David), is there any interest in forking libx86 and
>using it globally instead of fixing that ftbfs 7 times?
You could just send a patch to libx86 upstream, you know...
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59-chiark.mail.debian.de...@srcf.ucam.org
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
14 matches
Mail list logo
