On Mon, Nov 27, 2000, Michel LESPINASSE wrote:
> * shared objects do not actually have to be built with -fPIC. They
> work fine without it (on x86 at least).
I know it technically works, but Debian Policy requires PIC code for
shared libraries.
--
Sam.
On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 06:11:47AM +0100, Samuel Hocevar wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2000, Ben Collins wrote:
> > IMO, the better way would be if the CPU intensive portions were in a
> > shared library (even if the library is only used for this application).
> > Then you could have one binary program,
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000, Ben Collins wrote:
> IMO, the better way would be if the CPU intensive portions were in a
> shared library (even if the library is only used for this application).
> Then you could have one binary program, and do what libc6 does for
> optimized libs:
This looks very eleg
On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 05:21:14AM +0100, Samuel Hocevar wrote:
>In the case of CPU-hungry applications such as a movie player,
> MMX and PentiumPro optimizations can sometimes double the app's
> performances. The drawback is that a ppro+mmx binary will only work on a
> ppro+mmx CPU.
>
>Wh
On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 05:21:14AM +0100, Samuel Hocevar wrote:
>In the case of CPU-hungry applications such as a movie player,
> MMX and PentiumPro optimizations can sometimes double the app's
> performances. The drawback is that a ppro+mmx binary will only work on a
> ppro+mmx CPU.
[snip]
>
In the case of CPU-hungry applications such as a movie player,
MMX and PentiumPro optimizations can sometimes double the app's
performances. The drawback is that a ppro+mmx binary will only work on a
ppro+mmx CPU.
What can be done about that ? Doing separate packages doesn't look
very good t
On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 06:38:49AM +0100, Samuel Hocevar wrote:
>I know it technically works, but Debian Policy requires PIC code for
> shared libraries.
Yes. I dont know if its OK to pretend that "its not a shared library,
its just a plugin !" :)
--
Michel "Walken" LESPINASSE
Of course I t
On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 01:00:41AM -0500, Steve Robbins wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2000, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > I ship the upstream sources with the original Makefile.in's to avoid a huge
> > diff, and only patched Makefile.am's. I believe the automake-generated
> > makefiles will automatically
On Mon, 27 Nov 2000, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 26, 2000 at 02:40:51PM -0500, Steve Robbins wrote:
>
> > In light of the above, one solution that suggests itself is to just stick
> > autoconf and automake in the Build-depends line, and
> >
> > 1. run "make maintainer-clean" in debian/r
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000, Michel LESPINASSE wrote:
> * shared objects do not actually have to be built with -fPIC. They
> work fine without it (on x86 at least).
I know it technically works, but Debian Policy requires PIC code for
shared libraries.
--
Sam.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 06:11:47AM +0100, Samuel Hocevar wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2000, Ben Collins wrote:
> > IMO, the better way would be if the CPU intensive portions were in a
> > shared library (even if the library is only used for this application).
> > Then you could have one binary program
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000, Ben Collins wrote:
> IMO, the better way would be if the CPU intensive portions were in a
> shared library (even if the library is only used for this application).
> Then you could have one binary program, and do what libc6 does for
> optimized libs:
This looks very ele
On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 05:21:14AM +0100, Samuel Hocevar wrote:
>In the case of CPU-hungry applications such as a movie player,
> MMX and PentiumPro optimizations can sometimes double the app's
> performances. The drawback is that a ppro+mmx binary will only work on a
> ppro+mmx CPU.
>
>W
On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 05:21:14AM +0100, Samuel Hocevar wrote:
>In the case of CPU-hungry applications such as a movie player,
> MMX and PentiumPro optimizations can sometimes double the app's
> performances. The drawback is that a ppro+mmx binary will only work on a
> ppro+mmx CPU.
[snip]
>
In the case of CPU-hungry applications such as a movie player,
MMX and PentiumPro optimizations can sometimes double the app's
performances. The drawback is that a ppro+mmx binary will only work on a
ppro+mmx CPU.
What can be done about that ? Doing separate packages doesn't look
very good
On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 06:27:40PM +1300, Patrick Barr wrote:
>
> Hi everyone.
>
> I'm thinking about becoming a debian developer... but I just want to
> know what I could do. sure, I could update some really old packages
> but thats not doing anyone a really big help. I feel that my time
On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 04:40:53PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 02:18:26PM +0100, Denis Barbier wrote:
> > > > > mandb: warning: /usr/share/man/man1/wml_aux_linklint.1.gz: whatis
> > > > > parse for wml_aux_linklint(1) failed
> > > >
> > > > i am a new Debian developer, and
* "Thomas" == Thomas Lange <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[ Multiple binaries from one source ]
Thomas> Do I have to make two source packages for that, or can I
Thomas> create two single binary packages with different version
Thomas> numbers from one source ?
One source is OK. I do this with the axy
On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 06:27:40PM +1300, Patrick Barr wrote:
>
> Hi everyone.
>
> I'm thinking about becoming a debian developer... but I just want to
> know what I could do. sure, I could update some really old packages
> but thats not doing anyone a really big help. I feel that my time
On Sun, Nov 26, 2000 at 02:40:51PM -0500, Steve Robbins wrote:
> In light of the above, one solution that suggests itself is to just stick
> autoconf and automake in the Build-depends line, and
>
> 1. run "make maintainer-clean" in debian/rules(clean), to avoid diffing
>Makefile.in files, and
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 10:48:42PM +0100, Andreas Schuldei wrote:
> I think this ordering was introduced in the last dpkg release as a feature so
> links were not created befor the file which it linked to was there.
>
> Is that possible?
That seems reasonable, and probably lintian have not been
* Ben Collins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [001127 22:44]:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/build/mcal$ dpkg -c libmcal0_0.6-3_i386.deb
> > drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2000-11-27 21:58:08 ./
> > drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2000-11-27 21:57:53 ./usr/
> > drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2000-11-27 21:58:01 ./usr
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 04:30:06PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 10:26:46PM +0100, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 09:39:49AM +1300, Michael Beattie wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 07:58:29PM +0100, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> > > > > I think libmcal0 package
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 10:26:46PM +0100, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 09:39:49AM +1300, Michael Beattie wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 07:58:29PM +0100, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> > > > I think libmcal0 package should have a symlink
> > > > libmcal.so.0->libmcal.so.0.6.
> > post
On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 09:39:49AM +1300, Michael Beattie wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 07:58:29PM +0100, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> > > I think libmcal0 package should have a symlink
> > > libmcal.so.0->libmcal.so.0.6.
> postinst runs ldconfig? ldconfig will create the link. check the package
> ma
On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 04:40:53PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 02:18:26PM +0100, Denis Barbier wrote:
> > > > > mandb: warning: /usr/share/man/man1/wml_aux_linklint.1.gz: whatis parse for
>wml_aux_linklint(1) failed
> > > >
> > > > i am a new Debian developer, and have no
* "Thomas" == Thomas Lange <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[ Multiple binaries from one source ]
Thomas> Do I have to make two source packages for that, or can I
Thomas> create two single binary packages with different version
Thomas> numbers from one source ?
One source is OK. I do this with the ax
On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 06:27:40PM +1300, Patrick Barr wrote:
> Are there any developers (it would be a real help if they were in New
> Zealand too) who could help me out if I run into any trouble??
Where are you?
--
Michael Beattie ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 07:58:29PM +0100, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> > I think libmcal0 package should have a symlink libmcal.so.0->libmcal.so.0.6.
>
> The strange thing is that I have that. Verified via install and check :)
>
postinst runs ldconfig? ldconfig will create the link. check the package
Thomas Lange wrote:
>
> Before doing the upload, I like to spilt this package into two
> packages, because there's one part containing the scripts, and the
> other (very big) part consists of two special kernels. Do I have to
> make two source packages for that, or can I create two single binary
>
Hi everyone.
I'm thinking about becoming a debian developer... but I just want to
know what I could do. sure, I could update some really old packages
but thats not doing anyone a really big help. I feel that my time might
be better spent on possibly writing documentation or something simi
Josip Rodin:
> Yes, build daemons for i386, m68k, sparc, powerpc should be active.
All right. If I only could figure out how to do a source only upload
that won't overwrite my original tarfile, I'd be all set.
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerning unsolicited e-ma
On Sun, Nov 26, 2000 at 02:40:51PM -0500, Steve Robbins wrote:
> In light of the above, one solution that suggests itself is to just stick
> autoconf and automake in the Build-depends line, and
>
> 1. run "make maintainer-clean" in debian/rules(clean), to avoid diffing
>Makefile.in files, an
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 10:48:42PM +0100, Andreas Schuldei wrote:
> I think this ordering was introduced in the last dpkg release as a feature so
> links were not created befor the file which it linked to was there.
>
> Is that possible?
That seems reasonable, and probably lintian have not been
* Ben Collins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [001127 22:44]:
> > ola@chrystal:~/build/mcal$ dpkg -c libmcal0_0.6-3_i386.deb
> > drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2000-11-27 21:58:08 ./
> > drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2000-11-27 21:57:53 ./usr/
> > drwxr-xr-x root/root 0 2000-11-27 21:58:01 ./usr/lib
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 04:30:06PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 10:26:46PM +0100, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 09:39:49AM +1300, Michael Beattie wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 07:58:29PM +0100, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> > > > > I think libmcal0 package
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 10:26:46PM +0100, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 09:39:49AM +1300, Michael Beattie wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 07:58:29PM +0100, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> > > > I think libmcal0 package should have a symlink libmcal.so.0->libmcal.so.0.6.
> > postinst run
On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 09:39:49AM +1300, Michael Beattie wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 07:58:29PM +0100, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> > > I think libmcal0 package should have a symlink libmcal.so.0->libmcal.so.0.6.
> postinst runs ldconfig? ldconfig will create the link. check the package
> manually
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 07:46:50PM +0100, Mariusz Przygodzki wrote:
> On Monday 27 November 2000 19:39, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
>
> > > Hi
> >
> > I wonder about this error:
> > ...SNIP...
> > N: Processing binary package libmcal0 (version 0.6-3) ...
> > E: libmcal0: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shli
On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 06:27:40PM +1300, Patrick Barr wrote:
> Are there any developers (it would be a real help if they were in New
> Zealand too) who could help me out if I run into any trouble??
Where are you?
--
Michael Beattie ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
---
On Monday 27 November 2000 19:39, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> > Hi
>
> I wonder about this error:
> ...SNIP...
> N: Processing binary package libmcal0 (version 0.6-3) ...
> E: libmcal0: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib usr/lib/libmcal.so.0.6
> libmcal N:
> N: The package should not only include the
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 07:58:29PM +0100, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> > I think libmcal0 package should have a symlink libmcal.so.0->libmcal.so.0.6.
>
> The strange thing is that I have that. Verified via install and check :)
>
postinst runs ldconfig? ldconfig will create the link. check the package
Hi
I wonder about this error:
...SNIP...
N: Processing binary package libmcal0 (version 0.6-3) ...
E: libmcal0: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib usr/lib/libmcal.so.0.6 libmcal
N:
N: The package should not only include the shared library itself, but
N: also the symbolic link which ldconfig wo
Thomas Lange wrote:
>
> Before doing the upload, I like to spilt this package into two
> packages, because there's one part containing the scripts, and the
> other (very big) part consists of two special kernels. Do I have to
> make two source packages for that, or can I create two single binary
Hi everyone.
I'm thinking about becoming a debian developer... but I just want to
know what I could do. sure, I could update some really old packages
but thats not doing anyone a really big help. I feel that my time might
be better spent on possibly writing documentation or something sim
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 11:14:05AM +0100, Jorgen Schaefer wrote:
[snip]
>
> Is upstream alive? If yes, they should fix this kind of bug. If
> no, I guess there's not that much to do for you besides debugging
> the whole program :(
>
> Your fix with keeping a list of filenames would be a nice
>
Josip Rodin:
> Yes, build daemons for i386, m68k, sparc, powerpc should be active.
All right. If I only could figure out how to do a source only upload
that won't overwrite my original tarfile, I'd be all set.
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerning unsolicited e-m
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 07:46:50PM +0100, Mariusz Przygodzki wrote:
> On Monday 27 November 2000 19:39, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
>
> > > Hi
> >
> > I wonder about this error:
> > ...SNIP...
> > N: Processing binary package libmcal0 (version 0.6-3) ...
> > E: libmcal0: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shl
On Monday 27 November 2000 19:39, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> > Hi
>
> I wonder about this error:
> ...SNIP...
> N: Processing binary package libmcal0 (version 0.6-3) ...
> E: libmcal0: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib usr/lib/libmcal.so.0.6
> libmcal N:
> N: The package should not only include th
Hi
I wonder about this error:
...SNIP...
N: Processing binary package libmcal0 (version 0.6-3) ...
E: libmcal0: ldconfig-symlink-missing-for-shlib usr/lib/libmcal.so.0.6 libmcal
N:
N: The package should not only include the shared library itself, but
N: also the symbolic link which ldconfig w
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 11:14:05AM +0100, Jorgen Schaefer wrote:
[snip]
>
> Is upstream alive? If yes, they should fix this kind of bug. If
> no, I guess there's not that much to do for you besides debugging
> the whole program :(
>
> Your fix with keeping a list of filenames would be a nice
>
Hi guys,
I've build my first package called FAI (fully automatic
installation). Before I want to upload it, I want you have a look at
it and complain about errors I probably made.
Before doing the upload, I like to spilt this package into two
packages, because there's one part containing the scri
Hi guys,
I've build my first package called FAI (fully automatic
installation). Before I want to upload it, I want you have a look at
it and complain about errors I probably made.
Before doing the upload, I like to spilt this package into two
packages, because there's one part containing the scr
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 02:39:43AM +0100, Michael Moerz wrote:
> The problem is that metamail makes use of mkstemp and it leaves
> tmp files behind, when it is invoked with a multipart mime
> message. So you can see them in /tmp named mm.XX .
> My problem now is that it is hardly to track where
Michael Moerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > 3) Call unlink(2) or remove(3) on each file returned by mkstemp.
> >This assumes that metamail doesn't need to reference the file
> >by name lateron again.
>
> That's a nice idea, but the mkstemp function is called in a
> function called MkTmpF
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 03:37:16AM +0100, Jorgen Schaefer wrote:
> Michael Moerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The problem is that metamail makes use of mkstemp and it leaves
> > tmp files behind
> > [...]
> > 1) I could add each tmp file to a list and clean it up before the
> >program lea
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 02:39:43AM +0100, Michael Moerz wrote:
> The problem is that metamail makes use of mkstemp and it leaves
> tmp files behind, when it is invoked with a multipart mime
> message. So you can see them in /tmp named mm.XX .
> My problem now is that it is hardly to track wher
Michael Moerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > 3) Call unlink(2) or remove(3) on each file returned by mkstemp.
> >This assumes that metamail doesn't need to reference the file
> >by name lateron again.
>
> That's a nice idea, but the mkstemp function is called in a
> function called MkTmp
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 03:37:16AM +0100, Jorgen Schaefer wrote:
> Michael Moerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The problem is that metamail makes use of mkstemp and it leaves
> > tmp files behind
> > [...]
> > 1) I could add each tmp file to a list and clean it up before the
> >program le
59 matches
Mail list logo
