the
code which will be in jessie? I (perhaps naïvely) would expect them to
be primarily using the code in unstable, and maybe at a late stage of
bring-up rebuilding all of stable.
--
Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com
"There's nothing remarkable about it. A
all Debian packages, but disabled by default for the
compiler as shipped?
Matthias: if #3 were to be done, and some mechanism of either doing #4
or #1 were required, what additional objections (if any) would you
have?
Don Armstrong
--
Let me bring you up to speed:
We know nothing.
You are n
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Nov 2010, Don Armstrong wrote:
> >There are a couple of things here that should be worked out first
> >before the CTTE can make a decision:
>
> I assume that there is a decision to turn on hardening defaults?
No one
binary builds), or some combination of the above.
Don Armstrong
--
I really wanted to talk to her.
I just couldn't find an algorithm that fit.
-- Peter Watts _Blindsight_ p294
http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-re
Attached please find the patch for the NMU which I have just made to
the 1 day delayed queue.
Don Armstrong
--
A citizen of America will cross the ocean to fight for democracy, but
won't cross the street to vote in a national election.
-- Bill Vaughan
http://www.donarmstron
# Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.6
# reverting severity change even though this bug is closed
severity 429487 serious
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.6
# reverting severity change even though this bug is closed
severity 428509 serious
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 24 Sep 2006, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Don Armstrong writes:
> > It could be that it not being in libgcj7 was a bug, and the placement
> > of libgjsmalsa.so.0 was a bug as well... but at the next soname bump
> > adding unofficial sonames to the shared libraries in /usr/
On Sat, 23 Sep 2006, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Don Armstrong writes:
> > libgcj7-0 (and by extension libgcj7) are packaged such that any
> > soname increment will result in the old versions of libgcj no
> > longer being installable unless the gcj version is also
> > increm
the
soname if they really must be in the library package)
Second:
usr/lib/gcj-4.1/libgjsmalsa.la
libs/libgcj7,libs/libgcj7-0
should (most likely) be in libgcj7-dev instead since it's only any use
when you're using libtool to link.
Don Armstrong
--
You
der
the GFDL, this part of the copyright file would ideally be removed.
If it does, then for the purposes of releasing sarge, this bug would
be capable of getting a 'sarge-ignore'... but you'll have to talk to
the RMs for that.
Don Armstrong
--
For a moment, nothing happened. Th
f, which I kind of
suspect. However, I'm not the gcc-3.2 maintainer, so what do I know?
;-)]
Don Armstrong
--
I leave the show floor, but not before a pack of caffeinated Jolt gum
is thrust at me by a hyperactive girl screaming, "Chew more! Do more!"
The American will to cons
12 matches
Mail list logo
