On Tue, 6 Feb 2001, Chris Rutter wrote:
> I'm doing this now; I've filed a bug.
It should be in Incoming now.
c.
On 6 Feb 2001, James Troup wrote:
> > I'm doing this now; I've filed a bug.
>
> Err, what? Hello? buildd chroot support anyone?
Unpacking sendmail (from .../sendmail_8.9.3-21_arm.deb) ...
Setting up libpam0g-dev (0.72-13) ...
Setting up sendmail (8.9.3-21) ...
Stopping mail transport agent: s
Chris Rutter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, 3 Feb 2001, Philip Blundell wrote:
>
> > This isn't amenable to auto-building - it gets tangled up trying to replace
> > exim with sendmail on the buildd machine. Would somebody please build it
> > manually?
>
> I'm doing this now; I've filed
On Sat, 3 Feb 2001, Philip Blundell wrote:
> This isn't amenable to auto-building - it gets tangled up trying to replace
> exim with sendmail on the buildd machine. Would somebody please build it
> manually?
I'm doing this now; I've filed a bug.
c.
On Mon, 5 Feb 2001, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> Processor : Intel StrongARM-110 rev 2 (v4l)
> BogoMIPS: 1.90
> Hardware: Acorn-RiscPC
> Revision:
> Serial :
For everyone's interest, I think a revision T looks like this:
Processor :
On Sun, 4 Feb 2001, Richard Atterer wrote:
> Does ARMLinux run on pre-StrongARM processors now (in my case, an
> ARM710 inside my RiscPC)? IIRC, there was some discussion about this a
> few months ago and somebody said "there are a few problems now, but it
> should work soon". So, does it?
There
On Mon, Feb 05, 2001 at 07:46:01PM +, Peter Naulls wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm now seeing this, just to compound all my other build issues.
>
> revision 2's K, isn't it? I can probably swap my SAs over:
>
> Processor
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've got segvs out of lots of binaries on ARM, repeatably in the same place,
> and then they run fine (with a couple of exceptions) some of which have been
> traced to known bugs in K StrongARMs
>
> > > when comp
Philip Blundell wrote:
> >In other words, you don't install xpm4g when you have xlibs 4.0.2 installed,
> >nor, I suppose, xpm4g-dev when you have xlibs-dev.
>
> Ah, hmm. So what about the packages that mention xpm4g in their
> Build-Depends?
> Should xlibs "Provide" xpm4g as well as libxpm4?
I
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Daniel Reuter wr
ites:
>On an x86 under heavy compilation this message is usually indicating
>bad RAM, however I don't know, if this is also the case on an ARM
>(Suppose you're running an ARM, as you've mailed to the ARM-list),
>and I don't know, if this can also ha
On Mon, Feb 05, 2001 at 01:37:37PM +0100, Daniel Reuter wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On an x86 under heavy compilation this message is usually indicating
> bad RAM, however I don't know, if this is also the case on an ARM
> (Suppose you're running an ARM, as you've mailed to the ARM-list),
> and I don't k
Hello,
On an x86 under heavy compilation this message is usually indicating
bad RAM, however I don't know, if this is also the case on an ARM
(Suppose you're running an ARM, as you've mailed to the ARM-list),
and I don't know, if this can also happen regularly with small programs.
Regards,
Danie
>In other words, you don't install xpm4g when you have xlibs 4.0.2 installed,
>nor, I suppose, xpm4g-dev when you have xlibs-dev.
Ah, hmm. So what about the packages that mention xpm4g in their Build-Depends?
Should xlibs "Provide" xpm4g as well as libxpm4?
Thanks
p.
13 matches
Mail list logo
