Selon Aurelien Jarno:
>> But in a machine with glibc 2.5 and libc6-i386 2.5 that builds gcc
>> produces binary packages that are uninstallable on the same machine
>> because they conflict with glibc (<< 2.9-22). Is that intentional? To
>> me it seems to break the Law of Least Astonishment; if I b
Ludovic Brenta a écrit :
> Matthias Klose writes:
>> On 29.08.2009 18:38, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
>>> I would like to better understand the depencencies between the various
>>> gcc packages and libc6{,-i386}, in particular as they relate to the
>>> transition to /lib32.
>>>
>>> In debian/rules.conf
Matthias Klose writes:
> On 29.08.2009 18:38, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
>> I would like to better understand the depencencies between the various
>> gcc packages and libc6{,-i386}, in particular as they relate to the
>> transition to /lib32.
>>
>> In debian/rules.conf we have:
>>
>> libc_ver := 2.5
>>
On 29.08.2009 18:38, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
I would like to better understand the depencencies between the various
gcc packages and libc6{,-i386}, in particular as they relate to the
transition to /lib32.
In debian/rules.conf we have:
libc_ver := 2.5
ifneq (,$(findstring gnat,$(PKGSOURCE)))
l
I would like to better understand the depencencies between the various
gcc packages and libc6{,-i386}, in particular as they relate to the
transition to /lib32.
In debian/rules.conf we have:
libc_ver := 2.5
ifneq (,$(findstring gnat,$(PKGSOURCE)))
libc_ver := 2.9-21
endif
This variable generat
5 matches
Mail list logo