Re: c++11 mode in GCC is still marked as experimental (although armel needs work)

Hi On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 02:00:35PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > I would rather drop any package which does use c++11 features without any > reflection. I now understand the problem. Thanks. On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 01:10:52PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > No, just because some random c++1

Re: ext2 file system: moving between armel and amd64 etc.

Hi, On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 02:01:28PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote: > On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 01:01:25AM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote: > > > > I see fs/ext3/hash.c but do not see fs/ext2/hash.c in kernel. > > > > Let me be specific. Let me not make judgement if I ha

Re: ext2 file system: moving between armel and amd64 etc.

On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 11:36:56PM +0800, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > * Riku Voipio [2009-10-26 16:07]: > > > ext2 created by Debian lenny on amd64: > > > Filesystem flags: signed_directory_hash > > > > > > ext2 created by Ubuntu 09.4 armel: > > > Filesystem flags: unsigned_directory_hash

Re: ext2 file system: moving between armel and amd64 etc.

Hi, On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 04:07:58PM +0200, Riku Voipio wrote: > Hi Osamu, > > On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 09:25:36PM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote: > > I realized that mkfs.ext2 creates different superblock depending on which > > system it is run under. The difference can be o

ext2 file system: moving between armel and amd64 etc.

Hi, I realized that mkfs.ext2 creates different superblock depending on which system it is run under. The difference can be observed by tune2fs -l: ext2 created by Debian lenny on amd64: Filesystem flags: signed_directory_hash ext2 created by Ubuntu 09.4 armel: Filesystem flags: unsigne

Re: architecture: all but ... (please add armel to architecture list)

Thansk all for the comments. Since this is good info, I made a wiki page http://wiki.debian.org/PackageArchitectureAlmostAny based on the discussion here. On Sat, Jan 19, 2008 at 05:35:10PM +0100, Luk Claes wrote: > > > 4) wanna-build state dep-wait > > > > One option would be to put gs

Re: architecture: all but ... (please add armel to architecture list)

Hi Luk, I wish things were such simple. Here is the root cause etc. On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 06:58:40PM +0100, Luk Claes wrote: > Osamu Aoki wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Dear porter, please enlighten me. > > > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 02:26:20PM +, Martin Gu

architecture: all but ... (please add armel to architecture list)

Hi, Dear porter, please enlighten me. On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 02:26:20PM +, Martin Guy wrote: > Package: gsynaptics > Version: 0.9.7-3 > Severity: wishlist > User: debian-arm@lists.debian.org > Usertags: eabi > > Please add "armel" to the architecture list in debian/control (or make it > "