Re: From contrib to main

2004-01-11 Thread Jan Schulz
Hallo Arnaud, * Arnaud Vandyck wrote: >I'm not a wiki guru, so please, every maintainer (or not) can update the >page, thanks. >Also, please, note that with the 1.1.3 release of kaffe, a lot of >packages can now be build with it. done... >Last but not least, 'cdbs' could be *THE* way to build th

Re: Accepted kaffe 1:1.1.3-0.2 (powerpc source)

2004-01-11 Thread Dalibor Topic
Hi Stefan, Stefan Gybas wrote: However, building Kaffe for the other architectures has failed, in most cases while trying to rebuild the class library, e.g.: I've seen it too, it's somewhat embarrassing that 1.1.3 fixes most build problems due to out-of-date sources, only to crash during the bu

Re: Accepted kaffe 1:1.1.3-0.2 (powerpc source)

2004-01-11 Thread Stefan Gybas
Arnaud Vandyck wrote: kaffe_1.1.3-0.2_powerpc.deb to pool/main/k/kaffe/kaffe_1.1.3-0.2_powerpc.deb Thanks Arnaud! So we now have a current Kaffe version for i386 and powerpc. However, building Kaffe for the other architectures has failed, in most cases while trying to rebuild the class library

Re: Accepted kaffe 1:1.1.3-0.1 (i386 source)

2004-01-11 Thread Arnaud Vandyck
Kalle Kivimaa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> file. Changelog entries should be focused on the change, not the bug, and >> should be descriptive enough to allow someone who was not involved with the >> bug report (e.g., most users of the package) to und

Re: Accepted kaffe 1:1.1.3-0.1 (i386 source)

2004-01-11 Thread Kalle Kivimaa
Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > file. Changelog entries should be focused on the change, not the bug, and > should be descriptive enough to allow someone who was not involved with the > bug report (e.g., most users of the package) to understand what changed. Is there any reason to in