Bug#338743: [Pkg-bluetooth-maintainers] Re: Bug#338743: [bluez-utils #338743] More info

2005-12-28 Thread Bdale Garbee
On Fri, 2005-12-23 at 21:49 +0100, Filippo Giunchedi wrote: > > You are supposed to use the real MAKEDEV, not the one in experimental. > > reportedly, unstable (2.3.1-79) "MAKEDEV bluetooth" works as expected. > > Indeed this still holds as a bug for both bluez-utils and experimental > MAKEDEV,

Bug#338743: [Pkg-bluetooth-maintainers] Re: Bug#338743: [bluez-utils #338743] More info

2005-12-23 Thread Filippo Giunchedi
On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 09:25:28PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On Dec 23, Filippo Giunchedi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > it does not create devices, at least on powerpc with makedev 3.3.8.2-0: > You are supposed to use the real MAKEDEV, not the one in experimental. reportedly, unstable (2.3.

Bug#338743: [Pkg-bluetooth-maintainers] Re: Bug#338743: [bluez-utils #338743] More info

2005-12-23 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Dec 23, Filippo Giunchedi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > it does not create devices, at least on powerpc with makedev 3.3.8.2-0: You are supposed to use the real MAKEDEV, not the one in experimental. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Bug#338743: [Pkg-bluetooth-maintainers] Re: Bug#338743: [bluez-utils #338743] More info

2005-12-23 Thread Filippo Giunchedi
On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 07:21:30PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On Dec 23, Edd Dumbill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Can you verify the MAKEDEV constructs the appropriate devices exactly as > > the mknod from the postinst does? This was the reason I didn't use > > MAKEDEV in the first instance

Bug#338743: [bluez-utils #338743] More info

2005-12-23 Thread Edd Dumbill
Can you verify the MAKEDEV constructs the appropriate devices exactly as the mknod from the postinst does? This was the reason I didn't use MAKEDEV in the first instance, albeit some time ago. On Fri, 2005-12-23 at 09:41 +0100, Alexis Sukrieh wrote: > tags 338743 + patch > thanks > > * Marco d'I

Bug#338743: [bluez-utils #338743] More info

2005-12-23 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Dec 23, Edd Dumbill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Can you verify the MAKEDEV constructs the appropriate devices exactly as > the mknod from the postinst does? This was the reason I didn't use > MAKEDEV in the first instance, albeit some time ago. If it does not then it would be a MAKEDEV bug, a

Bug#338743: [bluez-utils #338743] More info

2005-12-23 Thread Alexis Sukrieh
tags 338743 + patch thanks * Marco d'Itri ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) disait : > cd /dev && ./MAKEDEV bluetooth > > less /sbin/MAKEDEV Thanks, here is attached a patch for the postinst script. I plan to make a sponsored NMU for closing this RC bug in bluez-utils' maintainer does not apply it. Best rega

Bug#338743: [bluez-utils #338743] More info

2005-12-22 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Dec 22, Alexis Sukrieh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The problem is that bluez-utils' postinst script creates two devices > nodes: > - /dev/vhci (major 10, minor 250) > - /dev/rfcomm (major 216, minor 0-255) > > I looked at the MAKEDEV manpage but didn't find any information about > how

Bug#338743: [bluez-utils #338743] More info

2005-12-22 Thread Alexis Sukrieh
Hello, I was looking for some RC bugs and found that one. I'd like to help if I can and I started investigating. The problem is that bluez-utils' postinst script creates two devices nodes: - /dev/vhci (major 10, minor 250) - /dev/rfcomm (major 216, minor 0-255) I looked at the MAKEDEV ma