On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 02:32:32PM +0100, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
> Aurelien Jarno writes:
> > On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 06:41:05PM +0100, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
> >> We were talking about BinMNUs of packages that build-depend on gnat-4.4,
> >> i.e. all Ada packages. Such BinNMUs are necessary if any A
Aurelien Jarno writes:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 06:41:05PM +0100, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
>> We were talking about BinMNUs of packages that build-depend on gnat-4.4,
>> i.e. all Ada packages. Such BinNMUs are necessary if any Ada source
>> file changes in the Ada run-time library.
>>
>> So, I'm st
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 06:41:05PM +0100, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
> Thorsten Glaser writes:
> > Reto Buerki dixit:
> >
> >>Ludovic Brenta schrieb:
> >>> Actually, since the patch applies to some C sources, not Ada, I do
> >>> not think BinNMUs are required anymore. The BinNMUs are only
> >>> require
Ludovic Brenta dixit:
>We were talking about BinMNUs of packages that build-depend on gnat-4.4,
Ok, I understand.
>So, I'm still willing to upload a fixed gnat-4.4 if and only if some
>other DD is willing to then rebuild all the reverse build-dependencies
>and re-upload them. Here is the curren
So, I'm still willing to upload a fixed gnat-4.4 if and only if some
other DD is willing to then rebuild all the reverse build-dependencies
and re-upload them. Here is the current list of affected packages:
Is it possible to automate this rebuilding by re-queuing the packages
listed on the kfre
Ludovic Brenta writes:
> So, I'm still willing to upload a fixed gnat-4.4 if and only if some
> other DD is willing to then rebuild all the reverse build-dependencies
> and re-upload them. Here is the current list of affected packages:
Is it possible to automate this rebuilding by re-queuing the
Thorsten Glaser writes:
> Reto Buerki dixit:
>
>>Ludovic Brenta schrieb:
>>> Actually, since the patch applies to some C sources, not Ada, I do
>>> not think BinNMUs are required anymore. The BinNMUs are only
>>> required if changing Ada source because of Ada's rules about
>>> consistency at the s
Reto Buerki dixit:
>Ludovic Brenta schrieb:
>> Actually, since the patch applies to some C sources, not Ada, I do not
>> think BinNMUs are required anymore. The BinNMUs are only required if
>> changing Ada source because of Ada's rules about consistency at the source
>> level. These rules do not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ludovic Brenta a écrit :
> Actually, since the patch applies to some C sources, not Ada, I do not
> think BinNMUs are required anymore. The BinNMUs are only required if
> changing Ada source because of Ada's rules about consistency at the source
> lev
Ludovic Brenta schrieb:
> Actually, since the patch applies to some C sources, not Ada, I do not
> think BinNMUs are required anymore. The BinNMUs are only required if
> changing Ada source because of Ada's rules about consistency at the source
> level. These rules do not apply to C, obviously.
>
Actually, since the patch applies to some C sources, not Ada, I do not
think BinNMUs are required anymore. The BinNMUs are only required if
changing Ada source because of Ada's rules about consistency at the source
level. These rules do not apply to C, obviously.
I'll upload a new version of gn
original message-
De: "Thorsten Glaser" t...@mirbsd.de
A: "Xavier Grave" gr...@ipno.in2p3.fr
Copie à: 564...@bugs.debian.org, debian-bsd@lists.debian.org
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 22:57:24 + (UTC)
-
> Xavier Gr
Xavier Grave dixit:
>#if defined (__FreeBSD__) || defined (__vxworks) || defined(__rtems__)
Make that:
#if defined(__FreeBSD__) || defined(__FreeBSD_kernel__) || \
defined(__vxworks) || defined(__rtems__)
bye,
//mirabilos
--
Sometimes they [people] care too much: pretty printers [and synta
>
>> There is a big difference between (kernels of) Linux and FreeBSD in this:
>>
>> Linux:
>> struct sockaddr {
>> short sa_family;
>> char sa_data[14];
>> }
>> FreeBSD:
>> struct sockaddr {
>> unsigned char sa_len;
>> unsigned char sa_family;
>> char sa_data[14];
>> }
>>
>> Ada bindings ha
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Petr Salinger a écrit :
>> I'm new to Debian GNU/kFreeBSD and I came to it in order to solve a
>> FTBFS bug (561121) in package polyorb. Bug 561121 is a consequence of
>> bug 564232 (in gnat-4.4). I have found a fix for 564232 (tested up to
>> packagin
15 matches
Mail list logo
