On Tue, Feb 08, 2000 at 05:49:32PM +0000, Vincent Renardias wrote:
>
> On Tue, 8 Feb 2000, Christian Meder wrote:
>
> > See below on alpha and sparc issues.
> >
> > > [Vincent 2000/01/07]
> > > package : emacs19
> > > version : 19.34-21.1
> > > architectures: i386 (ALPHA, SPARC & M68K MISSING!!!!)
> > > issue : Y2K fix in lisp/timezone.el
> >
> > The package is broken and won't compile from source as already noted in
> > January by Roman. Or did you fix it without bumping the version ?
>
> I'm not the author of this NMU, it has been done by Takuo KITAME
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
Still broken.
>
> > > [Vincent 2000/01/07]
> > > package : emacs20
> > > version : 20.5a-1.99
> > > architectures: i386 m68k sparc (ALPHA MISSING!!!!)
> > > issue : Y2K fix in lisp/timezone.el
> >
> > That's a hard one. It compiles ok but during the emacs lisp compilation it
> > goes boink. I tried egcs1.1.2 and egcs1.0.3a. Should I retry with gcc2.95.2
> > which isn't a slink compiler ? Or just leave it alone ?
>
> maybe try with gcc2.95.2? what's usually done when this happens? (it
> already happened I assume)
A lost cause. egcs1.0.3a, egcs1.1.2 and gcc2.95.2 break in the same fashion.
Probably a binutils problem. I'll write up a bug report for bug-emacs
>
> > > [Vincent 2000/01/18]
> > > package : mutt
> > > version : 1.0.0-3.2 (i386: 1.0.1.0-3.2)
> > > architectures: i386 sparc (ALPHA & M68K MISSING!!!!)
> > > issue : Y2K fix
> >
> > If you point me to the sources for 1.0.0-3.2 I'll compile it on Alpha or
> > should I recompile 1.0.1.0-3.2 ?
>
> 1.0.1.0-3.2 is okay.
Done.
I'll be away for the next week so won't be of any help til 20th.
But I guess alpha and sparc are done.
Greetings,
Christian
--
Christian Meder, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What's the railroad to me ?
I never go to see
Where it ends.
It fills a few hollows,
And makes banks for the swallows,
It sets the sand a-blowing,
And the blackberries a-growing.
(Henry David Thoreau)
