also sprach Rene Engelhard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.07.31.0203 +0200]:
> /usr/lib/debug/* should go into a -dbg package. Linda then does not
> complain. The debug stuff should not be in the normal package.
When the whole package is about debugging, does a -dbg package
really make sense?
> You pr
also sprach Rene Engelhard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004.07.31.0203 +0200]:
> /usr/lib/debug/* should go into a -dbg package. Linda then does not
> complain. The debug stuff should not be in the normal package.
When the whole package is about debugging, does a -dbg package
really make sense?
> You pr
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
martin f krafft wrote:
[ snip ]
> I am using dh_strip --keep-debug to keep these binaries purposely in
> place. Thus, I should probably override the last two errors.
> However, I am unsure about the first six lines. What do they mean?
> What am I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
martin f krafft wrote:
[ snip ]
> I am using dh_strip --keep-debug to keep these binaries purposely in
> place. Thus, I should probably override the last two errors.
> However, I am unsure about the first six lines. What do they mean?
> What am I
I maintain libcwd. For the latest release 0.99.37-2, linda reports
the following problems:
E: libcwd0; Object /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libcwd.so.0.99.37 is not directly
linked against libc.
E: libcwd0; Object /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libcwd_r.so.0.99.37 is not directly
linked against libc.
E: libcwd
I maintain libcwd. For the latest release 0.99.37-2, linda reports
the following problems:
E: libcwd0; Object /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libcwd.so.0.99.37 is not directly linked
against libc.
E: libcwd0; Object /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libcwd_r.so.0.99.37 is not directly linked
against libc.
E: libcwd
6 matches
Mail list logo