On Sun, 9 Sep 2001, Joey Hess wrote:
> Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > #define __NR_olduname 109
> > #define __NR_iopl /* 110 */ not supported
> > #define __NR_vhangup111
> > #define __NR_idle /* 112 */ Obsolete
> > #define __NR_vm86
On Sun, 9 Sep 2001, Joey Hess wrote:
> Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > #define __NR_olduname 109
> > #define __NR_iopl /* 110 */ not supported
> > #define __NR_vhangup111
> > #define __NR_idle /* 112 */ Obsolete
> > #define __NR_vm86
> [for general knowledge] i've looked throught the archives + google and
> can't find anything on libsdl1.2debian, could someone please tell me
> what the difference is, and why I need to change. Also how long will
> libsdl1.2debian be in sid for.
read this thread:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-d
On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 05:40:49PM +0100, Hereward Cooper wrote:
> I'm not quite sure about this bug:
>
> The libsdl1.2 libs have been replaced with libsdl1.2debian libs (see
> debian-devel for the sordid story), and xmms-jess needs to depend on the
> later.
>
> [for general knowledge] i've looke
On Sun, 9 Sep 2001, Joey Hess wrote:
> Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > #define __NR_olduname 109
> > #define __NR_iopl /* 110 */ not supported
> > #define __NR_vhangup111
> > #define __NR_idle /* 112 */ Obsolete
> > #define __NR_vm86
On Sun, 9 Sep 2001, Joey Hess wrote:
> Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> > #define __NR_olduname 109
> > #define __NR_iopl /* 110 */ not supported
> > #define __NR_vhangup111
> > #define __NR_idle /* 112 */ Obsolete
> > #define __NR_vm86
The libsdl1.2 libs have been replaced with libsdl1.2debian libs (see
debian-devel for the sordid story), and xmms-jess needs to depend on the
later.
Does this replace libsdl1.2 and libsdl1.2-dev?
Thanks again,
Hereward
I'm not quite sure about this bug:
The libsdl1.2 libs have been replaced with libsdl1.2debian libs (see
debian-devel for the sordid story), and xmms-jess needs to depend on the
later.
[for general knowledge] i've looked throught the archives + google and
can't find anything on libsdl1.2debian, co
> [for general knowledge] i've looked throught the archives + google and
> can't find anything on libsdl1.2debian, could someone please tell me
> what the difference is, and why I need to change. Also how long will
> libsdl1.2debian be in sid for.
read this thread:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-
On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 05:40:49PM +0100, Hereward Cooper wrote:
> I'm not quite sure about this bug:
>
> The libsdl1.2 libs have been replaced with libsdl1.2debian libs (see
> debian-devel for the sordid story), and xmms-jess needs to depend on the
> later.
>
> [for general knowledge] i've look
The libsdl1.2 libs have been replaced with libsdl1.2debian libs (see
debian-devel for the sordid story), and xmms-jess needs to depend on the
later.
Does this replace libsdl1.2 and libsdl1.2-dev?
Thanks again,
Hereward
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject o
I'm not quite sure about this bug:
The libsdl1.2 libs have been replaced with libsdl1.2debian libs (see
debian-devel for the sordid story), and xmms-jess needs to depend on the
later.
[for general knowledge] i've looked throught the archives + google and
can't find anything on libsdl1.2debian, c
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well, right now dpkg-architecture fails to output the proper canonical
> GNU architecture :(
Bug report and patch in #115655.
--
Robbe
signature.ng
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, 15 Oct 2001, James Troup wrote:
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > They should use --buind and --host because that saves on a very
> > CPU-expensive call to config.guess in the autobuilders.
>
> CPU-expensive?? I really wish people would give up trying to jus
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Also gettext (#100038, but upstream didn't seem terribly interested in
> changing this). This unfortunately introduces the need for triplet
> knowledge into packages that are otherwise entirely
> architecture-agnostic.
Whoa, this will affect a lot more p
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well, right now dpkg-architecture fails to output the proper canonical
> GNU architecture :(
Bug report and patch in #115655.
--
Robbe
signature.ng
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, 15 Oct 2001, James Troup wrote:
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > They should use --buind and --host because that saves on a very
> > CPU-expensive call to config.guess in the autobuilders.
>
> CPU-expensive?? I really wish people would give up trying to ju
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Also gettext (#100038, but upstream didn't seem terribly interested in
> changing this). This unfortunately introduces the need for triplet
> knowledge into packages that are otherwise entirely
> architecture-agnostic.
Whoa, this will affect a lot more
18 matches
Mail list logo
