On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 21:35:56 +0100, Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Le mercredi 09 mars 2005 à 11:23 -0800, Blunt Jackson a écrit :
> > I appreciate the clarification. What is desirable, then, is for the
> > developer
> > to be able to statically link hi
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 19:57:00 + (UTC), Jason Lunz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>
> I just figured out a way to do this for the ssh binary. Maybe this would
> work for you?
>
> Here's what I did:
>
> $ apt-get source ssh
> $ cd openssh-3.8.1p1
> $ debian/rules build
I a
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 05:00:52 -0600, Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Yes, dlopen, but the problem is version skew. With a dynamic libc6,
> libc and the NSS modules will always be compatible. With a static
> libc6, NSS functions (gethostbyname, getpwuid, etc.) will only work if
> the
On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 23:55:15 +0200, Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ti, 2005-03-08 kello 13:00 -0800, Blunt Jackson kirjoitti:
> > Does anyone know if this is an intentional decision on the part of the
> > glibc/nptl crew to refuse to support static linking of the
I discovered with some surprise that the 2.6 kernel does not come with
an archive version
of the NPTL pthreads library (ie., no libpthread.a). So, while
dynamically linked applications will link against NPTL by default,
building a statically linked application will not only link to
LinuxThreads by
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 17:08:41 -0600, John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Why were you not referring to the Debian documentation? It has been (or
> should have been) edited to reflect the "Debian way".
>
Well... I guess I'm the typical dumb user in this case. I didn't know
the documentatio
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 19:31:20 +, Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Scripsit Blunt Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > As a general note, I find it annoying, frustrating, and confusing
> > whenever ANY debian package has a substantially different
&g
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 12:16:24 -0500, Greg Folkert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Debian is unpopular Many places where Debian has changed the "globbed"
> config. Many people HATE little bitty files to make things work. Me,
> best thing since Sliced Bread. Except I'd rather see --keepcomments as
> d
lists / development projects equally appreciated.
-Blunt Jackson
--
-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble?
On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 12:13:29 +0100, Florent Rougon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm just trying to understand
> people who bash dselect on the first occasion. If you don't like dselect
> and don't fall in one of the cases I have mentioned, then we have a
> problem. Simply preferring aptitude is *n
On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 19:32:35 -0800, Brian Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 10:23:16PM -0500, Mason Loring Bliss wrote:
> > Maybe I'm still waiting for my first real problem to show up, but I
> > generally find dselect to be a real pleasure to use.
> >
> > Could you present
11 matches
Mail list logo
