user release.debian@packages.debian.org
usertag 610749 squeeze-can-defer
tag 610749 squeeze-ignore
kthxbye
On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 22:10:35 +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> Even if testing is not affected, it's a serious problem as packages are
> in unstable before moving to testing. This is wa
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 12:00:37PM +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> That's indeed another option. Clint, what do you think about it? Note
> it's only something temporary until we fix the real issue on eglibc.
If the only downside is that fakeroot will be broken when backported
to
_path might be altered by this
change significantly.
Better would be to override *at stubs only for fakeroot now.
Something like add in fakeroot's configure/configure.ac after
AC_CHECK_FUNCS(fchmodat fchownat fstatat mkdirat mknodat openat renameat
unlinkat)
-
case $ta
kernels is not perfect. FreeBSD 8.x have
>> this syscalls natively, and thus don't need emulation.
>> 2) newer versions of tar start to use the fstatat syscall.
>> 3) fakeroot doesn't emulate this syscall because it is marked as stub
>> in eglibc.
>>
>&g
k them as stub as the
> >emulation for FreeBSD 7.x kernels is not perfect. FreeBSD 8.x have
> >this syscalls natively, and thus don't need emulation.
> > 2) newer versions of tar start to use the fstatat syscall.
> > 3) fakeroot doesn't emulate this syscall b
8.x have
>this syscalls natively, and thus don't need emulation.
> 2) newer versions of tar start to use the fstatat syscall.
> 3) fakeroot doesn't emulate this syscall because it is marked as stub
>in eglibc.
Even before the original bug report, I did verify that
fa
e the fstatat syscall.
3) fakeroot doesn't emulate this syscall because it is marked as stub
in eglibc.
Even if testing is not affected, it's a serious problem as packages are
in unstable before moving to testing. This is way we have roughly 300
broken binary packages in the archive.
There
reassign 610749 eglibc
severity 610749 serious
thanks
On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 12:15:25AM +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 01:15:51AM +0100, Mats Erik Andersson wrote:
> > Package: fakeroot
> > Version: 1.14.5-1
> > Severity: important
> &g
Package: fakeroot
Version: 1.14.5-1
Severity: important
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-bsd@lists.debian.org
I have observed a very strange failure when using fakeroot
with dpkg-buildpackage under kfreebsd-amd64.
The issue at stake is that links are not assigned the ownership
of the superuser. Sometimes
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 08:40:25PM -0400, Clint Adams wrote:
> > Which version of libtool are you using? The only one that supports
> > GNU/FreeBSD is my hacked package of 1.5, which is the APT repository
> > and installed in khazad (/usr/bin/libtool)
>
> ltmain.sh (GNU libtool) 1.5 (1.1220.2.1 20
> Which version of libtool are you using? The only one that supports
> GNU/FreeBSD is my hacked package of 1.5, which is the APT repository
> and installed in khazad (/usr/bin/libtool)
ltmain.sh (GNU libtool) 1.5 (1.1220.2.1 2003/04/14 22:48:00)
(I'm using khazad's libtool.)
> If you're using th
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 02:05:46AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
>
> Which version of libtool are you using? The only one that supports
> GNU/FreeBSD is my hacked package of 1.5, which is the APT repository
of course, i meant _in_ the APT repository..
--
Robert Millan
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 07:19:51PM -0400, Clint Adams wrote:
> I get this from libtool:
>
> *** Warning: inter-library dependencies are not known to be supported.
> *** All declared inter-library dependencies are being dropped.
> *** The inter-library dependencies that have been dropped here will
On Tue, Feb 26, 2002 at 02:03:29PM +1100, matthew green wrote:
> hmm. i see this as far as real syscalls:
(snip)
Ok, in that case I think we're fine (the only ones of those wrapped by
fakeroot are the stat ones).
--
Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> there are lots of versioned system calls. i'm sure this really
> affects more than fstat(). the others probably just cause less
> drastic (but potentially more dangerous!) lossage.
Yup, it looks like fstat, lstat, stat, chown, chown, fchown, lchown and
possibly a couple o
On Tue, Feb 26, 2002 at 01:47:38PM +1100, matthew green wrote:
> there are lots of versioned system calls. i'm sure this really
> affects more than fstat(). the others probably just cause less
> drastic (but potentially more dangerous!) lossage.
Yup, it looks like fstat, lstat, stat, chown, cho
On Sun, Feb 24, 2002 at 08:43:11PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Fakeroot on NetBSD is dying inside libfakeroot. The mess of wrap* has left
> me sufficiently confused that I'm not really sure what's going on, and
> I've certainly got no idea why it dies. Doe
On Sun, Feb 24, 2002 at 08:43:11PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Fakeroot on NetBSD is dying inside libfakeroot. The mess of wrap* has left
> me sufficiently confused that I'm not really sure what's going on, and
> I've certainly got no idea why it dies. Does anyo
Fakeroot on NetBSD is dying inside libfakeroot. The mess of wrap* has left
me sufficiently confused that I'm not really sure what's going on, and
I've certainly got no idea why it dies. Does anyone who understands these
things better than me want to take a look at it?
--
Matthew G
19 matches
Mail list logo
