Re: [buildd] client_process_control: wrong client version 1

2006-08-07 Thread Stephen R Marenka
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 04:32:12PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Stephen R Marenka wrote: > > Any idea what's up with this? > > > > On vault13 ssh -S buildd.debian.org.ssh is giving this error. > > > > | client_process_control: wrong client version 1 > > You're using ssh

Re: [buildd] client_process_control: wrong client version 1

2006-08-07 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Stephen R Marenka wrote: > Any idea what's up with this? > > On vault13 ssh -S buildd.debian.org.ssh is giving this error. > > | client_process_control: wrong client version 1 You're using ssh protocol V1 to connect to a server accepting protocol V2 only? Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

[buildd] client_process_control: wrong client version 1

2006-08-07 Thread Stephen R Marenka
Any idea what's up with this? On vault13 ssh -S buildd.debian.org.ssh is giving this error. | client_process_control: wrong client version 1 Thanks, Stephen -- Stephen R. Marenka If life's not fun, you're not doing it right! <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> signature.asc Description: Digital signatu

Re: [buildd] Known workaround for graphicsmagick failure?

2006-08-07 Thread Stephen R Marenka
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 01:46:03PM +0200, Daniel Kobras wrote: > graphicsmagick 1.1.7-6 failed to build on m68k due to what looks > suspiciously like a binutils bug: I agree. I've just uploaded a binutils binNMU which should hopefully fix the problem. I've requeued graphicsmagick on a buildd that

[buildd] Known workaround for graphicsmagick failure?

2006-08-07 Thread Daniel Kobras
Hi! graphicsmagick 1.1.7-6 failed to build on m68k due to what looks suspiciously like a binutils bug: cc -Wall -g -fno-strict-aliasing -O2 -Wall -o .libs/drawtest drawtest.o -pthread -L/usr/lib/X11 -L/usr/lib ../magick/.libs/libGraphicsMagick.so /usr/lib/liblcms.so /usr/lib/libtiff.so -lc /usr

Re: [buildd] Etch?

2006-08-07 Thread Wouter Verhelst
On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 07:39:53PM +0200, Richard Zidlicky wrote: > On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 02:37:03PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > > * Using address register indirect with predecrement or postincrement mode > > > on the stack pointer (A7) in