On 12-Aug-99 Julian Gilbey wrote:
>>From what I recall from the GNU ftp site, bash-2.04 includes
> libreadline-4.0, so the major number *has* been bumped up. Perhaps we
> could switch to that which might alleviate this problem?
>
I don't know what is going on, but if I put a "hold" on the bash
[Charset iso-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...]
> Le 1999-08-12, Jason Gunthorpe _crivait :
>
> > This is due to a recent bash NMU which now pre-depends on the potato
> > libreadlineg2 which conflicts with the slink bash.
> >
> > Bash -MUST- be re-uploaded with the proper changes made so
Jason writes:
> Apparently it is usable enough to startup and run scripts. What you might
> be able to get away with is to put a normal Depends: librealine on bash -
> but I am not sure.
> Probably the best answer is that bash should not require bash to install
> itself!
A while back I had a libr
On Thu, 12 Aug 1999, Thomas Quinot wrote:
> > Bash -MUST- be re-uploaded with the proper changes made so that it can
> > exist with the slink libreadlineg2 ASAP.
>
> This is not so simple. Bash is unusable with slink's libreadline.
> Three bugs of severity important existed in the BTS for this
>
Le 1999-08-12, Jason Gunthorpe écrivait :
> This is due to a recent bash NMU which now pre-depends on the potato
> libreadlineg2 which conflicts with the slink bash.
>
> Bash -MUST- be re-uploaded with the proper changes made so that it can
> exist with the slink libreadlineg2 ASAP.
This is not
5 matches
Mail list logo
