This worksforme.
Andreas.
Index: jdk8u-3e6d3c8810ee/common/autoconf/generated-configure.sh
===
--- jdk8u-3e6d3c8810ee.orig/common/autoconf/generated-configure.sh
+++ jdk8u-3e6d3c8810ee/common/autoconf/generated-configure.sh
@@ -6862,
On 09/03/2015 04:44 PM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Sep 2015, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>
>> This worksforme.
Am I missing an email? I can't see Andreas' reply anywhere.
--
.''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - gl
On Thu, 3 Sep 2015, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> This worksforme.
Cool, thanks! I see some parts I already had, and I suspect that
a couple of the extra struct aligns were what I had missing.
@Doko: I’ll have another look at this then.
bye,
//mirabilos
--
tarent solutions GmbH
Rochusstraße 2-4, D-5
On Thu, 3 Sep 2015, Matthias Klose wrote:
> - openjdk-7 m68k is "not-for-us", needing intervention from somebody
It doesn’t work (not even Zero does), and nobody is capable enough
and has enough time to fix it (I tried, when I had a bit more time
for m68k, but I didn’t manage to fix either this
On 09/03/2015 08:53 AM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 03/09/2015 00:39, Matthias Klose a écrit :
>
>> I disagree. Please revert mips/mipsel back to gcj, or fix the mips/mipsel
>> builds
>> for openjdk-8 (and for openjdk-9). The other alternative would be not to
>> build
>> the packages for mips/mi
Le 03/09/2015 00:39, Matthias Klose a écrit :
> I disagree. Please revert mips/mipsel back to gcj, or fix the mips/mipsel
> builds
> for openjdk-8 (and for openjdk-9). The other alternative would be not to
> build
> the packages for mips/mipsel and file RC issues for packages building
> binary-
On 09/01/2015 11:21 PM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 29/07/2015 16:36, tmanc...@debian.org a écrit :
>
>> Any concerns with an upload of java-commons to experimental sooner than
>> September?
>
> I uploaded java-commons/0.53 to experimental with the switch to
> openjdk-8. I plan to switch sid in tw
Thanks a lot for the rebuild and the analysis Chris. There is some noise
caused by the maven2 dependency changes (i.e. the maven-scm and junit4
failures popping around these days), I'll try to clear that quickly to
have a better picture of the issues left.
Emmanuel Bourg
Le 29/07/2015 16:36, tmanc...@debian.org a écrit :
> Any concerns with an upload of java-commons to experimental sooner than
> September?
I uploaded java-commons/0.53 to experimental with the switch to
openjdk-8. I plan to switch sid in two weeks.
Emmanuel Bourg
I did a practice partial archive rebuild with ebourg's 1.8 default-jdk,
to see what kind of problems might be left. 1144 packages[1] that
dose-debuildcheck thinks depend on default-jdk, around ten
unexpected/new failures.
My full notes are on whiteboard[2], with a backup at time of sending[3].
F
Le 29/07/2015 16:36, tmanc...@debian.org a écrit :
> Any concerns with an upload of java-commons to experimental sooner than
> September?
Yes good idea.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.or
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 09:23:22PM -0700, tony mancill wrote:
> On 07/28/2015 12:49 AM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We are reaching the end of the OpenJDK 8 transition, we are down to one
> > package failing to build with the new version, and not the l
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 09:49:39AM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I suggest that we do the switch the first week of September. OpenJDK 7
> will remain available, but ultimately we aim for its removal in Stretch
> to lower the maintenance burden.
>
> What do you think?
+1
Wonderful n
On 07/28/2015 12:49 AM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We are reaching the end of the OpenJDK 8 transition, we are down to one
> package failing to build with the new version, and not the least since
> it's Eclipse. There is also a handful of patches available for othe
Am 28.07.2015 um 09:49 schrieb Emmanuel Bourg:
> Hi all,
>
> We are reaching the end of the OpenJDK 8 transition, we are down to one
> package failing to build with the new version, and not the least since
> it's Eclipse. There is also a handful of patches available for othe
Hi all,
We are reaching the end of the OpenJDK 8 transition, we are down to one
package failing to build with the new version, and not the least since
it's Eclipse. There is also a handful of patches available for other
packages waiting for their maintainers or a NMU [1].
I think we shoul
16 matches
Mail list logo
