On 03/11/11 at 21:27 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 14:11:26 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
> > At this point, I'm confident that we can reach a (at least partially)
> > working Ruby on kfreebsd, sparc and armel at some point. I'm less
> > confident about ia64.
> >
> > Que
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 14:11:26 +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> At this point, I'm confident that we can reach a (at least partially)
> working Ruby on kfreebsd, sparc and armel at some point. I'm less
> confident about ia64.
>
> Question: what should we do in the meantime? Options are:
> (1) kee
2011/10/23 Lucas Nussbaum :
>> [kfreebsd] waitpid from threads problem
> > [...]
>> [kfreebsd] thread-related hangs
FYI Petr has been working on a cleaner solution from Glibc side, see:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-bsd/2011/09/msg00072.html
--
Robert Millan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debi
Dear release team,
ruby1.9.1 1.9.3~rc1-1 is ready to migrate on some architectures. The
status on the others is a bit problematic.
I'm commenting below on the state of the various issues. The original
mail can be found at http://lists.debian.org/debian-sparc/2011/08/msg00038.html.
On 29/08/11 at
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 06:38:38PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:34:03PM +0400, Stanislav Maslovski a écrit :
> >
> > Because nobody on kfreebsd list was interested, and I myself is not
> > interested in that architecture, I decided to limit the ARCHs by only
> > those
Le Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:34:03PM +0400, Stanislav Maslovski a écrit :
>
> Because nobody on kfreebsd list was interested, and I myself is not
> interested in that architecture, I decided to limit the ARCHs by only
> those supported by fuse-utils. Respectively, I amended the
> Architecture: line
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 04:19:18PM +0300, Stanislav Maslovski wrote:
> The package builds on kfreebsd just fine, but I never tested if it
> really works there. Actually, before the last upload the package did
> not have any explicit dependency on fuse-utils, that is why it
> migrated to testing sea
On 06/04/2010 00:05, Adam Borowski wrote:
On Tue, Apr 06, 2010 at 01:05:52AM +0400, Stanislav Maslovski wrote:
As the original poster of that question on debian-mentors, I would
like to ask anyone who has access to a Debian/kFreeBSD installation to
test if fuse-convmvfs from sid works there
On Tue, Apr 06, 2010 at 01:05:52AM +0400, Stanislav Maslovski wrote:
> As the original poster of that question on debian-mentors, I would
> like to ask anyone who has access to a Debian/kFreeBSD installation to
> test if fuse-convmvfs from sid works there (provided that fuse4bsd is
> installed). My
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 01:38:56PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 01:05:37PM +0100, Simon Paillard wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 02:16:58PM +0300, Stanislav Maslovski wrote:
> > > One of my packages, fuse-convmvfs (uploaded by a sponsor), cannot
> > > migrate to testing. T
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 01:05:37PM +0100, Simon Paillard wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 02:16:58PM +0300, Stanislav Maslovski wrote:
> > One of my packages, fuse-convmvfs (uploaded by a sponsor), cannot
> > migrate to testing. The migration is blocked by kfreebsd:
> >
> > * fuse-convmvfs/kfreebs
11 matches
Mail list logo
