updated libc6, perl and apt packages?

Hi guys, Any chance of updated glibc, perl and apt packages? glibc's had a minor revision bump (2.2.1-1 to 2.2.2-1), perl's had a major reorganisation, and well, apt finally got released. TIA. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I don't speak for a

quinn-diff

I'm looking into setting up a quinn-diff somewhere on armlinux.org, as that seems to be common practice. If this isn't going to be helpful, stop me. c.

Re: ruby

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Philip Blundell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ># if defined(__GNUC__) && !defined(__alpha__) && !defined(__APPLE__) > >VALUE *stack_end = __builtin_frame_address(0); > ># else > > That should probably be `... && !defined(__arm__)'. Actually, > __built

Re: ruby

># if defined(__GNUC__) && !defined(__alpha__) && !defined(__APPLE__) >VALUE *stack_end = __builtin_frame_address(0); ># else That should probably be `... && !defined(__arm__)'. Actually, __builtin_frame_address(0) is just about OK, but the similar code in gc.c that does __builtin_frame_add

Re: Unremovable broken package

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Patrice LaFlamme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 09:09:56PM + or thereabouts, Peter Naulls wrote: > > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > > > > I think you meant to reply to the list instead of me. > > (I replied to you ca

Re: Unremovable broken package

On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 09:09:56PM + or thereabouts, Peter Naulls wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > > I think you meant to reply to the list instead of me. (I replied to you cause it seems you replied to me and not the list, the first time around. At least I received the m

Re: Unremovable broken package

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: I think you meant to reply to the list instead of me. > On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 07:08:39PM + or thereabouts, Peter Naulls wrote: > > What happens when you try to reinstall it over the top? > > > > e.g. > > dpkg -i > > I can't find it... (it's in

Re: ruby

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Philip Blundell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ./mkconfig.rb:44: stack level too deep (SystemStackError) > from ./mkconfig.rb:29:in `foreach' > from ./mkconfig.rb:29 > make[1]: *** [rbconfig.rb] Error 1 > make[1]: Leaving directory > `/home/build

Re: ruby

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Philip Blundell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This package has been failing to build for a while. Anybody want to > investigate? [ruby] I'm taking a look now. No promises. Peter -- -

ruby

This package has been failing to build for a while. Anybody want to investigate? p. ar rcu libruby.a array.o bignum.o class.o compar.o dir.o dln.o enum.o error.o eval.o file.o gc.o hash.o inits.o io.o marshal.o math.o numeric.o object.o pack.o parse.o process.o prec.o random.o range.o re.o re

Unremovable broken package

Hello, a few weeks ago, gsfonts-x11 package broke while upgrading. I thought it would get fixed eventually, but it didn't happen yet. So I thought I'd remove it today, but here' what I get: dpkg --purge gsfonts-x11 dpkg: error processing gsfonts-x11 (--purge): Package is in a very bad inconsis