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. Does anyone who understands t
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 anyone who understands these
> things
9 matches
Mail list logo
