Re: buildd on Armel, PowerPC and S390(x)? agree on narrowing error, why?

2011-12-09 Thread Mike Hommey
On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 10:41:35AM +0100, Steffen Möller wrote: > Dear list, > > I just sponsored a package that built nicely locally with g++ 6.4.2-5 on > amd64 but fails on the platforms listed in the subject line: > > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=ball&suite=sid > > which

Re: buildd on Armel, PowerPC and S390(x)? agree on narrowing error, why?

2011-12-09 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Fri, 09 Dec 2011 10:41:35 +0100, Steffen Möller wrote: Gcc 4.6.2-5 on amd64 does not complain at all. I do not know the version of gcc on the buildds. The build logs will tell you which version of gcc and other toolchain packages were used. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to deb

buildd on Armel, PowerPC and S390(x)? agree on narrowing error, why?

2011-12-09 Thread Steffen Möller
Dear list, I just sponsored a package that built nicely locally with g++ 6.4.2-5 on amd64 but fails on the platforms listed in the subject line: https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=ball&suite=sid which gives plenty of repeats of .. /source/DATATYPE/hashGrid.C:23:3: error: narrow

Re: Bug#561494: Fwd: devref and policy should agree on where to document tarball repacking

2009-12-18 Thread Russ Allbery
Thibaut Paumard writes: >> 2) most free licenses require to clearly specify modifications to >> licensed work. Deleting files is to be considered a modification of the >> source package, which _is_ the licensed work. >> >> By the same token, I am starting to realise that we should also >> certain

Fwd: devref and policy should agree on where to document tarball repacking

2009-12-18 Thread Thibaut Paumard
Developers , Debian Bug Debian BTS submit Objet : Rép : devref and policy should agree on where to document tarball repacking Le 17 déc. 09 à 17:28, Steve Langasek a écrit : Package: developers-reference Version: 3.4.3 On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 04:45:33PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: Char

Re: devref and policy should agree on where to document tarball repacking

2009-12-18 Thread Thibaut Paumard
Le 17 déc. 09 à 17:28, Steve Langasek a écrit : Package: developers-reference Version: 3.4.3 On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 04:45:33PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: Charles Plessy writes: while checking the section 6.7.8.2 of the Developers reference (“Repackaged upstream source”) in the context on

devref and policy should agree on where to document tarball repacking

2009-12-17 Thread Steve Langasek
leads to *both* locations being unreliable sources for this information. Moving this to a bug on the devref (per my personal preference); if consensus is that debian/copyright is the right place for this, then we can reassign it to policy, but one way or the other one of these documents should be c

Re: UBTA - Wall Street Journal Agree - Ref. s1957

2006-05-24 Thread Lance Archer
Dalton, P2P Sports Betting Software May Change Casino Sports Betting VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA - UBA Technology Inc. (UBTA), has entered into initial negotiations to install its proprietary betting exchange software in traditional land-based casinos. Read the whole story: http://br.geocitie

agree

2006-01-29 Thread Cord Beermann
Greetings from the Debian-Listmasters. We are still looking for a mailaddress which is forwarded to [EMAIL PROTECTED] That Mailadress seems to respond to all postings to our Mailinglist debian-devel with a challenge-response reply. This mail is a test mailing, to check if this address is the on

Can't we at least agree on Anti-Virus for our mail

2005-08-24 Thread Richard A Nelson
Just today 250+ viruses, mostly - clamd found the Worm.Mydoom.AT virus These are coming from master/gluck, and being a good citizen, I'm just dropping them on the floor (instead of creating backscatter). I know there's been heated debate about which, if any RBLs and other anti-spam tools to emp