On Sun, Dec 07, 1997 at 07:11:56PM +0100, Paul Seelig wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hamish Moffatt) writes:
> > The only prolbem is that you cannot produce these packages
> > on a purely bo system as some have promised/hoped. For example,
> > Tim Sailer is offering access to a bo system for backporti
On Sun, Dec 07, 1997 at 10:12:29AM -0500, Alex Yukhimets wrote:
> Well, I guess then libc5 machines dedicated to backporting should have
> dpkg-dev from hamm installed. And upload newer dpkg-dev to bo-unstable
> for consistency.
As well as patch from hamm, so that it is possible to unpack hamm
> > > Although dpkg-dev from hamm works fine on bo since it is not libc
> > > dependent, it's still not possible to backport on a completely-bo
> > > given this factor, unless I am missing something ..
> >
> > As far as I understand, you just told that you can use dpkg-dev from hamm
> > to produce
On Sun, Dec 07, 1997 at 08:44:06AM -0500, Alex Yukhimets wrote:
> > One problem with doing backports of libc5 packages is that
> > dpkg-dev in bo doesn't seem to support pristine sources;
> > it complained that the original wasn't in the .orig subdirectory.
> >
> > Although dpkg-dev from hamm work
> One problem with doing backports of libc5 packages is that
> dpkg-dev in bo doesn't seem to support pristine sources;
> it complained that the original wasn't in the .orig subdirectory.
>
> Although dpkg-dev from hamm works fine on bo since it is not libc
> dependent, it's still not possible to
One problem with doing backports of libc5 packages is that
dpkg-dev in bo doesn't seem to support pristine sources;
it complained that the original wasn't in the .orig subdirectory.
Although dpkg-dev from hamm works fine on bo since it is not libc
dependent, it's still not possible to backport on
6 matches
Mail list logo
