Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 265678 important
Bug#265678: fakeroot gdb segfaults on mips
Bug#264920: file on mips needs too much memory
Severity set to `important'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system a
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 279423 wishlist
Bug#279423: libc6-dev: totally incoherent pthread related includes files for dynamic
linking
Severity set to `wishlist'.
> retitle 279423 libc6-dev: libc6-dev should ship /usr/include/nptl
Bug#279423: libc6-dev: totally incohe
severity 279423 wishlist
retitle 279423 libc6-dev: libc6-dev should ship /usr/include/nptl
merge 279423 276062
thanks
At Wed, 03 Nov 2004 23:03:53 +0100,
Eric Valette wrote:
> Eric Valette wrote:
>
> >> In fact most distributions do exactly the same as
> >> Debian with their default headers and d
Repository: glibc-package/debian/local/manpages
who:gotom
time: Sat Nov 6 03:20:04 MST 2004
Log Message:
start 2.3.2ds1-19.
Fix #279685.
- debian/local/manpages/gencat.1: Use \fR instead of \fT for bold
font, and use .TP instead of .PP for option usage. Patched by
Repository: glibc-package/debian
who:gotom
time: Sat Nov 6 03:20:04 MST 2004
Log Message:
start 2.3.2ds1-19.
Fix #279685.
- debian/local/manpages/gencat.1: Use \fR instead of \fT for bold
font, and use .TP instead of .PP for option usage. Patched by
Lars Wi
Package: libc6-dev
Version: 2.3.2.ds1-18
Severity: wishlist
The current maintainer seems more concerned about closing bug report
than actually fixing the bugs.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linu
GOTO Masanori wrote:
severity 279423 wishlist
retitle 279423 libc6-dev: libc6-dev should ship /usr/include/nptl
merge 279423 276062
thanks
At Wed, 03 Nov 2004 23:03:53 +0100,
Eric Valette wrote:
Eric Valette wrote:
In fact most distributions do exactly the same as
Debian with their default headers
At Sat, 06 Nov 2004 13:34:27 +0100,
Eric Valette wrote:
> > OK, we will ship /usr/include/nptl in future, like
> > /usr/lib/libpthread.a issue (#276062). I tagged this bug as wishlist,
> > and changed title, and merged with #276062. If you have another
> > comments, please let us know.
> >
> > R
Your message dated Sat, 06 Nov 2004 23:21:54 +0900
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#279970: Please educate debian libc6-dev maintainer
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.9.9 (Unchained Mel
GOTO Masanori wrote:
Yes, I think you're correct. I didn't deny your opinion. So I tagged
it as wishlist for working future glibc package after sarge.
Whishlist for me means : not a bug. I think if/whenever a NPTL
implementation has a pthread related structure size differerent than a
linuxthre
On Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 03:53:31PM +0100, Eric Valette wrote:
> GOTO Masanori wrote:
>
> >Yes, I think you're correct. I didn't deny your opinion. So I tagged
> >it as wishlist for working future glibc package after sarge.
>
> Whishlist for me means : not a bug. I think if/whenever a NPTL
> i
Repository: glibc-package/debian
who:gotom
time: Sat Nov 6 07:55:14 MST 2004
Log Message:
- debian/sysdeps/linux.mk: Drop -fomit-frame-pointer from compiling
option to build NPTL packages in order to get valid backtrace.
-D__USE_STRING_INLINES is also dropped to
Repository: glibc-package/debian/sysdeps
who:gotom
time: Sat Nov 6 07:55:15 MST 2004
Log Message:
- debian/sysdeps/linux.mk: Drop -fomit-frame-pointer from compiling
option to build NPTL packages in order to get valid backtrace.
-D__USE_STRING_INLINES is also dr
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
They are binary compatible, in the set of things exported by both, if
that's what you're asking. Otherwise providing both at runtime would
not work.
Thanks for responding and clarifying this. So the remainding problems
are only :
- Performance,
- Posix compliance/ diffe
Some brokers claim to get you the ra t e. less than 5.0
but they never do. We can really provide you with 3.6 ra t e
even with bad cr e dit
http://www.nelomatye.com/
Mamie
--
calfskin - be a proliferate citizenry strange
of westbound be jolla boogie
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL P
On Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 08:18:11AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
> severity 279722 normal
> thanks
>
> At Thu, 04 Nov 2004 22:37:34 +0100,
> wim delvaux wrote:
> > Valgrind shows the following backtrace ...
> >
> > ==7105== Invalid read of size 4
> > ==7105==at 0x1C22857E: __gconv_release_step
Package: libc6
Version: 2.3.2.ds1-18
Severity: normal
Hi
I tried debug/profile my project and found that ld.so.8 is very ancient.
I've found that even Sun manpage is more usable then that in Debian :(
I discovered the Debian source has in man-pages-1.67 newer versions of some
manpages:
./man1/l
Package: libc6
Version: 2.3.2.ds1-18
Severity: normal
Hi,
Please move sprof from libc6-prof to libc6-dev or even to libc6.
It's precious even without lib*_p.a.
Mirek
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (995, 'testing'), (910, 'unstable'), (1, 'experi
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 280030 wishlist
Bug#280030: libc6: sprof location
Severity set to `wishlist'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--
T
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 280027 wishlist
Bug#280027: libc6: Ancient manpages - ld.so & etc
Severity set to `wishlist'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs d
severity 280030 wishlist
thanks
At Sat, 06 Nov 2004 20:19:22 +0100,
Miroslaw Kwasniak wrote:
> Please move sprof from libc6-prof to libc6-dev or even to libc6.
> It's precious even without lib*_p.a.
Why? We everytime need concrete reason to change something like this
because libc6 affects a lot
22 matches
Mail list logo
