Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well, with 10.015 (currently in http://incoming.debian.org/) I
> have gone back to the time tested debugging tool, the print
> statement. Could you try with 10.015, and see if we can discover what
> was going wrong?
whatever changes happen
On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 22:57:54 -0800, Alex Romosan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> sorry, i even tried running dpkg in debug mode and i didn't get any
> more information and looking at the code i wasn't able to figure out
> what went wrong. it happens somewhere after checking for the
> symbolic links
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Unfortunately, there is not a whole lot of detail to go on
> here. As for the clean problem, do you see ./stamp-building? If so,
> that is the culprit; normally, make-kpkg creates stamp-building while
> calling dpkg-buildpackage (which in t
Hi,
Unfortunately, there is not a whole lot of detail to go on
here. As for the clean problem, do you see ./stamp-building? If so,
that is the culprit; normally, make-kpkg creates stamp-building while
calling dpkg-buildpackage (which in turn calls clean, and we do not
want dpkg-buildpa
4 matches
Mail list logo
