On Fri, Dec 09, 2005 at 11:07:10AM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> arrangements are supposed to make sure that the timestamps are correct
> and I will have to check this since obviously the shipped hcommon.c
> was out of date.
well... this might be related to the fact that i had patched both in the
de
Hello Ian, me again :)
there is a last problem, hcommon.c.m4 is missing ENOTSOCK, which will cause
a false regression failure. However since it is shipping hcommon.c, it
depends on the file timestamps on which system it will be used. I just
uploaded an 1.1-3 which adds ENOTSOCK to .c.m4. So this m
tag 340384 +patch
thanks
Hello Juri,
thanks for all your help (and please say thanks to Steve). I didnt want to
rewrite all of the code, so I just changed the alocation of the structures
in the following way:
Index: arp.c
===
RCS
On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 11:00:28PM -0800, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> In
> that case the cast from sockaddr to sockaddr_in is a problem. The sockaddr
> structure consists of a short (2 bytes) and an array of 14 chars, so it is
> allowed to be aligned (and is, in fact, aligned) on the 2-byte boundary,
On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 09:26:46AM -0800, Blars Blarson wrote:
> Sorry it has taken so long for me to get you this info.
thank you very much Blars for the help, this is much apreciated.
the bus error on sparc64:
> #0 0x701029cc in inet_aton () from /lib/libc.so.6
> #1 0x00013f84 in INET_resol
Hallo,
according to db.debian.org we have two sparc machines (aric and vore) for
Developers. However vore seems to be unable, and on auric I can't log in.
(it wont ask me for the pubkey i have in the databse and it wont accept the
password)
I need a sparc64 test system to debug a bus error (#340
do you know if this was introduced in -16 (or earlier?) i.e. what was the
last version which worked?
> #0 0x70104220 in inet_aton () from /lib/libc.so.6
> #1 0x00014028 in ?? ()
> #2 0x00014028 in ?? ()
if you have some time at hand you could try to debug this with a debug
build, however it m
reassign 328602 wnpp
retitle 328602 RFA: redir needs new maintainer
severity 328602 normal
thanks
On Fri, Sep 16, 2005 at 12:32:32PM +0200, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> After 7 days without answer from you (the maintainer) we will reassign
> this bug to either WNPP (in case we propose to orphan
On Sat, Aug 13, 2005 at 01:06:45AM -0400, Ari Pollak wrote:
> I'll be doing a 7-day-delayed NMU of this, with only the attached patch
> as the changes.
thanks. Please observe version numbering. It is the second NMU
Bernd
--
(OO) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --
( .. )[EMAIL PROTECTED],linux.de
Re NMU of symlinks: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=273338
On Sat, May 14, 2005 at 05:49:24AM -0500, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > if anybody send me mails in the last two month to ecki at debian.org the
> > chances are high I havent received it due to some missconfig on my site.
> >
10 matches
Mail list logo
