James Troup wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Are you alive? I think Santiago is having evil ideas about hijacking
> packages.
>
> --
> James
I _am_ alive...just barely. Unfortunately, it looks like a) most of my
mail for the past month ended up in the bit bucket, and b) I'm no longer
going to have time to
Johnie Ingram wrote:
> Dude!
>
> The egcs bunch is going to make an official release of egcs in like 3
> hours; Elliot Lee and a bunch of developers are looking all over IRC
> for you. :-)
I don't do IRC. Will check it out, but be warned--I'm hurting for disk space
right now. I'll see about c
Graham C. Hughes wrote:
>
> > Amulet is a huge free C++ GUI toolkit. Please see
> > http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~amulet . It builds and runs out of the box on
> Debian.
> > Someone please volunteer to package it.
>
> There's a slight problem with that, BTW. From the Amulet
> documentation:
>
> Amulet
John Goerzen wrote:
>
> OK, then I suspect the policy is at fault. (BTW, I checked it out and
> I did find dc and bc on SunOS -- I had not known these programs were
> on other OSs.)
>
> By the current definition of Important:
[snip]
> * lilo should not be there because lilo is not part of UNIX
Mark Eichin wrote:
>
> Hmm. While there are *particular* problems doing 32->64 bit cross
> compilation, doing any 32->32 compilation is probably *quite* solid.
> (In particular, compilers targeting the 68k are probably *better* than
> the x86 native compiler -- because we've [we==Cygnus] actually
Mathieu Guillaume wrote:
>
> Package: cpp 2.7.2.2-5
>
> This is the same kind of bug that was reported as #10753
> (update-alternative).
> When I try to upgrade to this version, I get an error related to
> cross-device links (/lib/cpp is a symlink to /usr/bin/cpp, which is
> mounted on a differen
Thomas Koenig wrote:
> An attractive alternative would be RIPEMD-160. SHA-1, another
> alternative, has the main problem that its design parameters are secret.
> Source code for RIPEMD-160 is avialiable, and the algorithm is in the
> public domain. For more information, you can check out
> http:/
Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>
> On Jun 22, Galen Hazelwood wrote
> > Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > Nope. What happens is most (single-cpu) developers upload the source
> > and binaries for one architecture. Then helpful and nice developers who
> > own other machines upload
Michael Meskes wrote:
>
> Does this mean I could upload all architecture version for my packages?
> If so yes, I think it's useful.
>
> Michael
>
Well, I personally distrust cross-compilers...at least gcc cross
compilers. I know that at least one crossover (i386->alpha) has been
known to produ
Mark Baker wrote:
>
> > g77: needs gcc source code to build
>
> Yes, but the alternative is for the source package to be much bigger than it
> needs to be. A better solution would be to merge the source packages.
>
Perhaps you mean something else by the word "merge", but, again, merged
so
Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> Galen Hazelwood:
> > The autoconf script is finding (I believe) the
> > msgfmt binary from xview-dev, which despite it's name has no connection
> > to locale support.
>
> Something needs to be fixed so that the package will build even
Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> fileutils: calls msgfmt with wrong arguments
No, you have the wrong msgfmt. :) {file,shell,text}utils require the
gettext package to be installed in order to build properly. This
package contains xmsgfmt, which formats text versions of translation
files into bina
Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> It occurred to
> me that since most of the Debian packages
> are also available for m68k and also
> Sparc and Alpha now, the develops are probably
> using cross-compilation, rather than actually
> owning all these machines.
Nope. What hap
Colin Plumb wrote:
>
> Package: info, tin
> Version: 3.9-5, 970613-2
>
> Both of these packages depend on libc6 and ncurses3.4.
> I'm tracking hamm very closely, and have seen no sign of ncurses3.4.
> I haven't seen an ncurses version more recent than 1.9.9g, actually.
>
> Is there any particula
I've finally released an ncurses3.0 package for hamm, with an -altdev
package for those of us on mixed-library machines. I've put it into my
home directory on master, hopefully to be joined RSN by ncurses3.4 for
libc6.
As soon as both of them are up and (seemingly) running, I'll put them in
Incom
Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
> who is working on ncurses ?
I was about to start. :)
> i made ncurses 4.1 for local use and could upload it right now (ok, it's
> revoked). it would only take me a few hours to downgrade to the latest
> ncurses 1.9.9g IIRC, and a few more to create a altdev package.
Vincent Renardias wrote:
>
> it's good idea, but since ncurses is orphaned this won't help for this
> package. Is the libc6 maintainer opposed to maintain ncurses as a libc6
> add-on (Or si someone willing to adopt ncurses)?
>
I'm thinking of adopting ncurses, and might prepare a temporary libc6
Johnie Ingram wrote:
>
> Am I correct in thinking the major players to be synchronized here are
> shellutils (who), sysvinit (last), netstd (rsh), login, ppp, procps,
> wu-ftpd, and ssh?
>
Add xbase (xdm) and you've pretty much got it covered.
--Galen
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST:
Rob Browning wrote:
>
> Galen Hazelwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I think it also chooses some instructions differently for a 486, and
> > these choices are also good on the pentium. That's why, when building
> > binaries for my use, I use
Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> On 1 Jun 1997, Mark Eichin wrote:
>
> > > I believe libc5.so is LGPL...
> >
> > I don't. /usr/doc/libc5//copyright doesn't *mention* the LGPL *at
> > all*, though the libc6 one mentions both.
>
> Yep, the copyright file does not mention the LGPL at all. This seems to
Mark Eichin wrote:
>
> > I just brought this up, since it was my understanding that if you
> > want to write a commercial program (ie. not under the GPL), and
> > link it against cygwin.dll, you've got to pay Cygnus $$$. Not all
> > that different than the restrictions on Qt, really.
>
> Two que
Mark Eichin wrote:
>
> yeah, cygwin32.dll is under the GPL. So? It's a DLL, like libc5 and
> libc6 are... [the *only* thing I'm aware of that actually uses the
> LGPL is libg++; it was as much of an experiment as anything, and I'm
> not aware of any not-otherwise-free software taking advantage of
Guy Maor wrote:
> I think the only optimization gcc 2.7.* does for i486 is instruction
> alignment. The Pentium has a better fetch unit so doesn't need any
> alignment (it never incurs a misfetch penalty) so optimizing for i486
> will at least give some code bloat.
I think it also chooses some in
Ben Pfaff wrote:
> Just butting in on this thread to ask a question. Is there a
> de-compiler for Infocom games? Would such a de-compiler produce
> readable source code? Just a thought... (I know nothing about the
> Infocom game language or the binary format.)
Check out "txd" in the ztools pac
Raul Miller wrote:
>
> On May 31, Galen Hazelwood wrote
> > Perhaps. Anybody have any serious arguments? I think the reason we
> > configure gcc as i486 is so it automatically optimizes for the 486; it's
> > a good middle ground.
>
> If I remember right
Brian White wrote:
> I wasn't aware that the Z-machine knowledge had changed in the past
> half-dozen years or so. The "infocom" program handles all the games
> I've ever tried with it, so I don't see why it is obsolete.
Oh, it works fine in normal cases. But we now understand certain
obscure v5
Christian Schwarz wrote:
>
> On Thu, 29 May 1997, Galen Hazelwood wrote:
> > (Don't ask me what the historical reasons are, though. I might start to
> > whimper...)
>
> Sorry, but I couldn't resist :-) What are the reasons?
I don't know. That's wh
Michael Alan Dorman wrote:
>
> Debian developers:
>
> ESR has, IMHO, decided to start a pissing match about ncurses
> development. I have no desire to participate or watch.
>
> My frank recommendation is that we ditch ncurses entirely, go back to
> BSD curses and termcap and encourage authors o
Michael Alan Dorman wrote:
>
> RMS has stepped in. I can't quite decide if that's likely to foster
> resolution or small-arms usage.
>
Stepped in on whose side?
--Galen
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL
Charles Briscoe-Smith wrote:
> Hi! I subscribed a few days ago, (and have been somewhat overwhelmed
> by the quantity of mail on this list; is there a digestified version?)
> and would like to propose that I package up Inform, Frotz, and some of
> the associated games.
[pro-infocom propaganda snip
Christian Schwarz wrote:
>
> Next step: GNU's "configure" utility. I thought that we had agreed on
> using
> i386-unknown-linux
> (and similar for the other architectures), but then I had just discovered
> that GCC uses
> /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i486-linux/2.7.2.1/
>
Thomas Koenig wrote:
>
> I just spent an interesting afternoon trying to upgrade a 1.1 system
> to 1.3.
>
> First, /var/lib/dpkg/available was corrupted because of some
> incorrect values in the Version - field (somehow they had gotten to
> the format of 1:1-2 or similar; bug report submitted).
Gregor Hoffleit wrote:
>
> > Include the multi-thread support patch for the Objective-C runtime lib (???)
>
> bo includes gstep-base-0.2.12 and gstep-base-0.2.12 includes a patch file
> gcc-2.7.2.1-objc.diff, which therefore should be applied to the gcc in bo
> (the patch applies fine to gcc-2.7.
33 matches
Mail list logo
