Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 276312 important
Bug#276312: NPTL: race in implementation of pthread_cond_broadcast
Severity set to `important'.
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(
Both of these bugs seem like reasonably serious issues. I'm not sure
exactly which one 'mine' is, but it looks a bit more like 276312:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1220692&group_id=12997&atid=112997
Like the bug Stefan reports, this has caused problems on machines tha
Package: libc6-dev
Version: 2.3.2.ds1-21
Severity: normal
Hello,
consider the following example:
#include
int main(void)
{
struct timespec a;
nanosleep(&a, &a);
return 0;
}
Compilation with "gcc -Wall -g -std=c99" produces the following errors:
c.c: In Funktion »main
On 6/16/05, David Welton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Both of these bugs seem like reasonably serious issues. I'm not sure
> exactly which one 'mine' is, but it looks a bit more like 276312:
Ah, I see that 314408 is an amd64 thing, so mine is either 276312, or
some other NPTL. In any case, the v
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 312406 libc6
Bug#312406: gnome-core: Does not install in SID
Bug reassigned from package `gnome-core' to `libc6'.
> severity 312406 grave
Bug#312406: gnome-core: Does not install in SID
Severity set to `grave'.
> merge 312406 313219
Bug#31240
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.8.14
> reassign 312406 glibc
Bug#312406: gnome-core: Does not install in SID
Bug reassigned from package `libc6' to `glibc'.
> merge 312406 313219
Bug#312406: gnome-core: Does not install i
to, 2005-06-16 kello 10:47 +0200, Baurzhan Ismagulov kirjoitti:
> #include
>
> int main(void)
> {
> struct timespec a;
> nanosleep(&a, &a);
> return 0;
> }
>
> Compilation with "gcc -Wall -g -std=c99" produces the following errors:
>
> c.c: In Funktion »main«:
> c.c:5: error:
Hello Lars,
On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 12:47:13PM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> The -std=c99 option means that you want strict compliance to the 1999
> version of the C standard. That standard does not define struct timespec
> or nanosleep in or anywhere else. Thus, there is no bug.
struct timespe
to, 2005-06-16 kello 12:10 +0200, Baurzhan Ismagulov kirjoitti:
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 12:47:13PM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> > The -std=c99 option means that you want strict compliance to the 1999
> > version of the C standard. That standard does not define struct timespec
> > or nanosleep i
The attached dpatch file enabled me to compile version 2.3.5-1 from
experimental with /bin/sh pointing at dash. It's a very simple change by
now, I just copied the remaining unfixed part from Eric Wong's latest
mail in this bug report.
dash.dpatch
Description: application/shellscript
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 207391 = patch
Bug#207391: glibc: fails to build if /bin/sh != bash
Tags were: moreinfo sid
Tags set to: patch
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(admini
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tag 177940 + fixed-in-experimental
Bug#177940: AC_FUNC_MKTIME fail when timezone is set to GMT-2
There were no tags set.
Tags added: fixed-in-experimental
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug trackin
tag 177940 + fixed-in-experimental
thanks
I used the attached program (based on the test in autoconf) to test that
this bug occurs with libc6 2.3.2.ds1-22 (the version in unstable) but
not with version 2.5.2-2 (the version in experimental). Thus, I tag it
fixed-in-experimental.
#include
#include
Notice ALERT:
This is your Second Notification, there now are two potential deals for your
review.
Please note that past credit history is a non-issue as long as you respond in a
timely fashion.
Verify your information with our secure form to ensure our records are accurate.
http://www.mort
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 314350 fixed-upstream
Bug#314350: libc6: sysconf(_SC_HOST_NAME_MAX) always returns -1
There were no tags set.
Tags added: fixed-upstream
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system admi
At Tue, 14 Jun 2005 23:28:23 +0200,
Jens Seidel wrote:
> attached you will find an update of the German PO file de.po.
>
> Note that this is a semi automatic created mail which contains all issues I
> found during checking most of Debians German PO files. This includes also
> encoding but mostly t
tags 314350 fixed-upstream
thanks
At Wed, 15 Jun 2005 23:10:51 +0100,
Roger Leigh wrote:
> Sorry, I meant to attach a testcase to the original report:
>
> #include
> #include
>
> int main (void)
> {
> long hn = sysconf(_SC_HOST_NAME_MAX);
> printf("Hostname max length: %ld\n", hn);
> ret
At Sun, 12 Jun 2005 22:32:13 +0200,
Rene Engelhard wrote:
> A OOo2 build fails with the new linux-kernel-headers installed (at least
> on powerpc; not tested on i386 yet.)
I put the patch for the next version, thanks for your report.
Regards,
-- gotom
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTEC
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 312036 fixed-upstream
Bug#312036: libc6: Valgrind reports invalid memory access for printf("%1$e",
1.);
There were no tags set.
Tags added: fixed-upstream
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug t
tags 312036 fixed-upstream
thanks
At Mon, 30 May 2005 17:39:46 -0400,
Justin Pryzby wrote:
> Yet, valgrind reports:
> Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s)
> at 0x1B96: __printf_fp (in /lib/tls/libc-2.3.2.so)
> by 0x1B963D7B: vfprintf (in /lib/tls/libc-2.3.2.so)
Author: gotom
Date: 2005-06-16 14:23:27 + (Thu, 16 Jun 2005)
New Revision: 928
Modified:
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.3.4/debian/changelog
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.3.4/debian/sysdeps/hppa.mk
Log:
* debian/sysdeps/hppa.mk: Add /usr/hppa64-linux-gnu/include symlinks for
d
Author: gotom
Date: 2005-06-16 14:33:26 + (Thu, 16 Jun 2005)
New Revision: 929
Modified:
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.3.4/debian/changelog
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.3.4/debian/po/de.po
Log:
* Jens Seidel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
- debian/po/de.po: Fix typo. (Closes: #314084
Author: gotom
Date: 2005-06-16 14:59:46 + (Thu, 16 Jun 2005)
New Revision: 930
Added:
linux-kernel-headers/branches/lkh-branch-2.6.12/debian/patches/asm-ppc-sigcontext.patch
linux-kernel-headers/branches/lkh-branch-2.6.12/testsuite/wait.c
Modified:
linux-kernel-headers/branches/lkh-b
Author: gotom
Date: 2005-06-16 15:03:14 + (Thu, 16 Jun 2005)
New Revision: 931
Modified:
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.3.4/debian/changelog
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.3.4/debian/po/vi.po
Log:
Fixes 311793 for debian/po/vi.po.
Modified: glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.3.4/debian/ch
Package: libc6
Version: 2.3.2.ds1-22
Followup-For: Bug #314408
Just following up ... I built glibc with the patch above, and installed it
on a production server: so far, so good.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel:
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.8.14
> unmerge 314484
Bug#314484: Error on login: 'The Application "gnome-panel" has quit
unexpectedly'
Bug#312406: gnome-core: Does not install in SID
Bug#313219: gnome-vfs2 crashes in rea
On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 12:10:44PM +0200, Baurzhan Ismagulov wrote:
> struct timespec and nanosleep are POSIX, and should be defined in time.h
> according to SUSv3 (see, e.g.,
> http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xsh/nanosleep.html). I
> don't see why strict C99 compliance should affect
www.0p4flzi64t07f10.rubbishingje.com
récriminerez les vers sommeilleriez, cela. appréciez copiner ébranlâtes sur
autofinancent cela sous surmonte ce narcissiques.
sans brunissait cela lanternait sous ressentir faucheur du sous épaulerons
veillons du piment.
du prénommez cela au-dessus immiscerie
Now that sarge is out the door I'd like to fix the problem of local
hostname resolution so that it works properly for all systems,
including mobile ones.
First of all, the system hostname should always be its own canonical
hostname in the sense of hosts(5), unless the system has a static
domain na
Previously Thomas Hood wrote:
> First of all, the system hostname should always be its own canonical
> hostname in the sense of hosts(5), unless the system has a static
> domain name, in which case the canonical hostname should be the FQDN
> formed from the system hostname and the domain name.
I'm
On Thu, 2005-06-16 at 21:07 +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Thomas Hood wrote:
> > First of all, the system hostname should always be its own canonical
> > hostname in the sense of hosts(5), unless the system has a static
> > domain name, in which case the canonical hostname should be t
Previously Thomas Hood wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-06-16 at 21:07 +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> > I'm not quite sure what you mean here. If you mean the system should
> > always use a fixed hostname
>
> I don't mean that. I mean that when you do gethostbyname() on the
> system hostname, the h_name y
> The getgrname(3) man page says:
>
> The getgrnam() function returns a pointer to a structure containing the
> group information from /etc/group for the entry that matches the group
> name name.
The glibc info document says this:
-- Function: struct group * getgrnam (const char *NAME)
Notice ALERT:
This is your Second Notification, there now are two potential deals for your
review.
Please note that past credit history is a non-issue as long as you respond in a
timely fashion.
Verify your information with our secure form to ensure our records are accurate.
http://www.sell
34 matches
Mail list logo
