Steven Chamberlain:
>> It fails to build with our default-jdk. On kfreebsd that is currently
>> gcj, which seems insufficient to build eclipse.
>>
>> So, eclipse could maybe change to a more specific build-depends if
>> that's appropriate, so that openjdk-7-jdk is used, since we do have it.
>>
>>
On 06/09/13 23:16, Bruno Maximo e Melo wrote:
> I can't understand very well...the transitions is necessary or not?
It's simply a change to the java-defaults package. Seems we will be
going ahead with this very soon because the benefits seem to outweigh
the risks.
After that the next build attem
I can't understand very well...the transitions is necessary or not?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1378505806.5602.1.camel@debian
Accepted:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2013 21:58:15 +0200
Source: kfreebsd-kernel-headers
Binary: kfreebsd-kernel-headers
Architecture: source kfreebsd-amd64
Version: 9.2~2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: high
Maintainer: GNU/kFreeBSD Maintainers
On 06/09/13 21:55, Robert Millan wrote:
> The way I see it, as things stand now it makes a lot more sense to
> bypass default-jdk in order to get things working...
What do you mean by that? To tighten the build-dependencies of eclipse
and others, that can't build with gcj?
I think the risk is th
On 06/09/2013 23:24, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> On 06/09/13 21:55, Robert Millan wrote:
>> The way I see it, as things stand now it makes a lot more sense to
>> bypass default-jdk in order to get things working...
> What do you mean by that? To tighten the build-dependencies of eclipse
> and othe
Michael Biebl:
> Am 06.09.2013 02:49, schrieb Michael Biebl:
>> /usr/include/sys/vnode.h:41:27: fatal error: sys/rangelock.h: No such
>> file or directory
>> #include
>
> FWIW, this looks like a bug in sys/vnode.h or kfreebsd-kernel-headers.
Thanks. Fixed in 9.2~2.
--
Robert Millan
--
To U
On 06/09/13 20:38, Robert Millan wrote:
> Speaking of which, what's the current status? AFAICT -release said it
> doesn't require their explicit approval?
Oops, I forgot to copy my reply to the list:
On 06/09/13 11:54, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> On 06/09/13 04:52, Bruno Melo wrote:
>> why eclips
kfreebsd-kernel-headers_9.2~2_kfreebsd-amd64.changes uploaded successfully to
localhost
along with the files:
kfreebsd-kernel-headers_9.2~2.dsc
kfreebsd-kernel-headers_9.2~2.tar.gz
kfreebsd-kernel-headers_9.2~2_kfreebsd-amd64.deb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on host
Bruno Melo:
> why eclipse is not in kfreebsd? it's the best ide, i think necessary...
We can't build it until after the openjdk-7 transition, I'm afraid.
Speaking of which, what's the current status? AFAICT -release said it
doesn't require their explicit approval?
--
Robert Millan
--
To UNSU
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 03:07:43 +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> 2. connection in the past few minutes is in TIME_WAIT state - for some
> reason it still fails even though SO_REUSEADDR is requested here (and I
> think this is important - needs followup). There seems to be a race
> within the t
11 matches
Mail list logo