On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 5:56 PM, Dominique
Belhachemi wrote:
>> http://packages.debian.org/search?suite=sid&searchon=contents&keywords=libjawt.so
>
> I am wondering if there is a transition ongoing from 'powerpc' to 'ppc' or
> vice versa ?
May I also jump in and ask about the difference in between
> http://packages.debian.org/search?suite=sid&searchon=contents&keywords=libjawt.so
I am wondering if there is a transition ongoing from 'powerpc' to 'ppc' or vice
versa ?
These packages are using 'ppc'
/usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/jvm/java-6-openjdk/jre/lib/ppc/libjawt.so openjdk-6-dbg
/usr/lib/g
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 1:35 PM, Onkar Shinde wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 2:45 PM, Mathieu
> Malaterre wrote:
>> Hi there,
>>
>> We are currently working on the VTK package, after a report of FTBS:
>>
>> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=541891
>>
>> We changed
>>
>> /usr/lib/j
Package: java-common
Version: 0.33
Severity: normal
--- Please enter the report below this line. ---
[12:19] ~ => sudo update-java-alternatives --plugin -s java-6-sun
burek
Using '/usr/lib/jvm/java-6-sun/jre/lib/amd64/libnpjp2.s
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 2:45 PM, Mathieu
Malaterre wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> We are currently working on the VTK package, after a report of FTBS:
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=541891
>
> We changed
>
> /usr/lib/jvm/default-java/jre/lib/$(ARCH)/libjawt.so
>
> into
>
> /usr/lib
http://packages.debian.org/search?suite=sid&searchon=contents&keywords=libjawt.so
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Hi there,
We are currently working on the VTK package, after a report of FTBS:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=541891
We changed
/usr/lib/jvm/default-java/jre/lib/$(ARCH)/libjawt.so
into
/usr/lib/jvm/default-java/jre/lib/$(CPU)/libjawt.so
But this is not the proper so
Le mercredi 02 septembre 2009 à 14:22 +0530, Onkar Shinde a écrit :
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> > Le mardi 28 juillet 2009 à 20:29 +0530, Onkar Shinde a écrit :
> >> According to following changelog entry, the build of javadoc was
> >> disabled on armel to fix BTFS o
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
> Le mardi 28 juillet 2009 à 20:29 +0530, Onkar Shinde a écrit :
>> According to following changelog entry, the build of javadoc was
>> disabled on armel to fix BTFS of libjogl-java.
>>
>> libjogl-java (1.1.1+dak1-5) unstable; urgency=low
>>
On Wed Sep 02 08:46, Michael Koch wrote:
> IMO a possible solution would be to have two (or more) packages and let other
> packages using jgrapht (Build-)Depend on the version they need. E.g.
> libjgrapht-java
> could always be the latest API and libjgrapht0.6-java is an older API which
> some
>
Le mardi 28 juillet 2009 à 20:29 +0530, Onkar Shinde a écrit :
> According to following changelog entry, the build of javadoc was
> disabled on armel to fix BTFS of libjogl-java.
>
> libjogl-java (1.1.1+dak1-5) unstable; urgency=low
> .
>* Standards-Version updated to version 3.8.1
>* Dis
11 matches
Mail list logo