Matthew,
I had to do the patch to environment.mak also. I believe I used Wartan's patch
that was on the list a few months ago.
I had problems with ftp-archive also. At different points, with different
versions, and different versions of g++, it has segfaulted, failed to compile,
and just plain won
On Sun, Feb 03, 2002 at 04:01:32AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Oh, no, got it. Unless a certain set of magic words appears in the host
> architecture, it builds with static libraries. buildlib/environment.mak.in
> probably needs patching to be a touch saner.
Yup, that does it. Hacking environ
On Sun, Feb 03, 2002 at 03:55:32AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> The COMPILING doc actually implies that the shared library problem and the
> "Unable to determine a suitable system type" may be linked. Again, this is
> probably a post-sleep problem.
Oh, no, got it. Unless a certain set of magic
On Sun, Feb 03, 2002 at 03:53:29AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> apt now builds - diff attached. The package still won't build due to lack
> of doc generation (missing debian-sgml), and for some reason that I
> haven't been able to work out the shared libraries for libapt-pkg aren't
> generated w
apt now builds - diff attached. The package still won't build due to lack
of doc generation (missing debian-sgml), and for some reason that I
haven't been able to work out the shared libraries for libapt-pkg aren't
generated which also trips up the production of the packages. It's rather
early in t
I think an essential base package would make sense. If it's a shared library,
it will be required by too many package to make it build-essential. The -dev
package would be build-essential.
On Sat, Feb 02, 2002 at 11:31:42PM +0100, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 02, 2002 at 10:09:33PM +, M
On Sat, 2 Feb 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> getopt is in libiberty. It's also in glibc, and people have a bad
> habit of not checking for that in configure. I'm thinking about
> packaging libiberty, and
Also a BSD-licensed getopt (and getopt_long) is available in the NetBSD
libc.
Jeremy C. R
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002-02-02T16:32-0500]:
> Yes, I think we all have that problem. I'll write up a patch for
> configure to support wildcards. I think that's the only place that
> will actually need them. I've configured gcc to use
> i386-unknown-freebsd4, so dpkg finds that when it looks for th
* Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-02-02T22:09+]:
> On Sat, Feb 02, 2002 at 03:00:47PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
>
> > It isn't already? *blink*
>
> Apparantly not. I thought I'd put it in the libc package, but...
[220]% dlocate -S libiberty
binutils-dev: /usr/include/libiberty.h
bi
El ds, 02 feb 2002 03:33:40 Matthew Garrett ha escrit:
One line addition to the OpenSSL Configure which seems to get it to
build:
"debian-netbsd-i386","gcc:-DL_ENDIAN -DTERMIOS -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
-Wall::-D_REENTRANT::BN_LLONG ${x86_gcc_des}
${x86_gcc_opts}::dlfcn:bsd-gcc-shared:-fPIC"
On Sat, Feb 02, 2002 at 10:09:33PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > Uhm, yes. Definitely should be packaged. That way we at least have a way
> > to allow folks to declare (build|)dependancies on "GNU libc or libiberty".
Packages never depend on libc, becuase it's a (build-)essential package.
>
On Sat, Feb 02, 2002 at 03:00:47PM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> It isn't already? *blink*
Apparantly not. I thought I'd put it in the libc package, but...
> Uhm, yes. Definitely should be packaged. That way we at least have a way
> to allow folks to declare (build|)dependancies on "GNU libc or lib
On Sat, Feb 02, 2002 at 03:59:50PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> getopt is in libiberty. It's also in glibc, and people have a bad habit of not
> checking for that in configure. I'm thinking about packaging libiberty, and
> making patches to check for getopt there. Might be easier to deal with
On Sat, Feb 02, 2002 at 11:58:11AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 02, 2002 at 12:15:46PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I think it might be a good idea to merge them. However, I need to upgrade
> > a bit first. I'm still using 1.9.16.
> >
> > Any thoughts about using wildcards in archt
getopt is in libiberty. It's also in glibc, and people have a bad habit of not
checking for that in configure. I'm thinking about packaging libiberty, and
making patches to check for getopt there. Might be easier to deal with than
fifty separate versions across fifty source packages...
On Sat, Feb
On Sat, Feb 02, 2002 at 12:15:46PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I think it might be a good idea to merge them. However, I need to upgrade
> a bit first. I'm still using 1.9.16.
>
> Any thoughts about using wildcards in archtable? It'd be nice to be able
> to say i386-unknown-freebsd*, and have
On Sat, Feb 02, 2002 at 10:30:51AM +, Matthew Vernon wrote:
> Hi,
>
> ed package (binary) is at
> http://www.pick.ucam.org/~matthew/netbsd/ed_0.2-19_netbsd-i386.deb
>
> md5sum is 0d08768459c589722584903fc658fa0c
>
> The package is of course unsigned, but this mail is signed :)
FYI - there
Sorry, but I think a CD release is a long ways away. I believe we're all still
basically bootstrapping, so it'll probably be a while yet before it even boots.
On Sat, Feb 02, 2002 at 01:25:26AM -0800, Gary Kline wrote:
>
>Gents,
>
>It's been great seeing the solid D-BSD progress in the p
I think it might be a good idea to merge them. However, I need to upgrade a bit
first. I'm still using 1.9.16.
Any thoughts about using wildcards in archtable? It'd be nice to be able to say
i386-unknown-freebsd*, and have configure work with that. Much nicer than
putting each release in there.
On Sat, Feb 02, 2002 at 04:05:28PM +0100, Andreas Schuldei wrote:
> Furthermore I am surprised that the start-stop daemon compiled
> for you, since in my version I checked out of cvs I found the
> #ifdefs messed up for openbsd.
> does it work for you guys?
This was the latest dpkg in unstable, ra
concerning the dpkg patch, which mail i deleted accidently.
I have some more changes to the buildsystem which are needed on
openbsd, mainly because it is broken and does not support some
stuff.
this is for example a configure check for gnu make, ncurses vs
curses, problems with __va_copy and add
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hi,
ed package (binary) is at
http://www.pick.ucam.org/~matthew/netbsd/ed_0.2-19_netbsd-i386.deb
md5sum is 0d08768459c589722584903fc658fa0c
The package is of course unsigned, but this mail is signed :)
Matthew
- --
"At least you know where you are with Mic
Gents,
It's been great seeing the solid D-BSD progress in the past few
weeks. When there is a CD/DVD set available--or at least someplace
where people could retrieve binaries or src code--I would like to
cover the DebianBSD distribution in the Answerman column of
Daemonnews.o
On Sat, Feb 02, 2002 at 03:03:48AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 04:06:03PM -0500, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
>
> > Well, I didn't really want to take control of that away from Matthew
> > Garrett.
> > Of course, he could always email me a snapshot and I would put it on the
>
24 matches
Mail list logo
