* Jens Reyer , 2016-07-05, 21:24:
First off, many thanks again for that script. Unfortunately it fails in
Ubuntu (see #827770):
./debian/scripts/sonames2elf libcups.so.2 libdbus-1.so.3 libfontconfig.so.1
libfreetype.so.6 libGL.so.1 libgnutls.so.30 libgsm.so.1 libjpeg.so.8
libncurses.so.5 libo
On 28.05.2016 12:30, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Jens Reyer , 2016-05-27, 20:17:
>> I think I have it working now in wine to automatically generate a list
>> of runtime dependencies. I based it on Jakub's suggestions, however I
>> didn't go for creating a "dependency binary".
>>
>> For one I did get resu
On 05/28/2016 07:17 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 2:17 AM, Jens Reyer wrote:
>
>> Then (instead of creating a binary linking to the required
>> libraries and running dpkg-shlibdeps on this) I replicate things
>> from dpkg-shlibdeps(1) to identify the library package names for
>> t
* Jens Reyer , 2016-05-29, 17:37:
Should I put your coyright and the MIT/X11 (BSD like) license in the
script, as seen in dctypes2elf?
Yes, please do.
--
Jakub Wilk
On 05/28/2016 12:30 PM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Jens Reyer , 2016-05-27, 20:17:
>> I think I have it working now in wine to automatically generate a list
>> of runtime dependencies. I based it on Jakub's suggestions, however I
>> didn't go for creating a "dependency binary".
>>
>> For one I did get r
Hi Jens!
>- first find the library file on the system (looking in some
> hardcoded directories),
I'm really sure it won't add any value to your current solution, but you might
consider asking ld or whatever the list of search paths
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9922949/how-to-print-the-ldlin
* Jens Reyer , 2016-05-27, 20:17:
I think I have it working now in wine to automatically generate a list
of runtime dependencies. I based it on Jakub's suggestions, however I
didn't go for creating a "dependency binary".
For one I did get results this way, but unfortunately I neither really
k
On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 2:17 AM, Jens Reyer wrote:
> Then (instead of creating a binary linking to the required
> libraries and running dpkg-shlibdeps on this) I replicate things
> from dpkg-shlibdeps(1) to identify the library package names for
> these sonames:
I wonder if the best solution woul
On 05/19/2016 05:53 PM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Jens Reyer , 2016-05-19, 16:57:
>> First off, I'm not sure about every single dependency if it is needed
>> at all.
>
> Quick grep over the *.dll.so indeed shows that they use a bunch of
> libraries you mentioned:
[...]
> I guess a better method of obt
* Jens Reyer , 2016-05-19, 16:57:
First off, I'm not sure about every single dependency if it is needed
at all.
Quick grep over the *.dll.so indeed shows that they use a bunch of
libraries you mentioned:
$ strings /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/wine/*.dll.so | grep '^lib.*[.]so[.]' | sort
-u | gre
pon
>package?
unfortunately I think there isn't a way.
BTW if you do dlopen of a library, there is no guarantee that the latest
release will work,
so even if such a way would exist, it won't be the safe thing to do.
shlibs:Depends guarantees that the correct library is picked up at
Hi,
I'm working on adding more runtime dependencies to wine (see #823991).
Wine uses the dh sequencer and all relevant binary packages have a
"Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}". This adds some runtime dependencies, but
by far not for every build-dependency -dev package.
If I try to do
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 12:13:06PM +0200, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> hi,
>
> for some reason, if I recompile iipimage from a sid chroot I keep
> getting a warning:
>
> [...]
> dpkg-gencontrol: warning: Depends field of package iipimage-server:
> unknown substitution v
On 09/12/2014 12:13, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> for some reason, if I recompile iipimage from a sid chroot I keep
> getting a warning:
>
> [...]
> dpkg-gencontrol: warning: Depends field of package iipimage-server:
> unknown substitution variable ${shlibs:Depends}
> [...]
&g
hi,
for some reason, if I recompile iipimage from a sid chroot I keep
getting a warning:
[...]
dpkg-gencontrol: warning: Depends field of package iipimage-server:
unknown substitution variable ${shlibs:Depends}
[...]
It did worked well in the past. Now even libc is not part of the
Depends
On Sat, 19 Mar 2011, Panayiotis Karabassis wrote:
> So, to summarize:
>
> If:
> a) /usr/bin/foo of package foo needs at RUN-TIME /usr/lib/libbar.so
> b) /usr/lib/libbar.so is packaged under package libbar
>
> then I need to:
> c) add package libbar-dev as a BUILD dependency of foo.
>
> And dh_sh
> Although I am just a simple DM, I still don't agree completely. Both my
> upstreams call binaries (not libraries) in their programs (via a shell
> or system call). As far as I can tell, that won't (and should not by the
> name) be picked up by the ${shlibs:Depends} variable.
> Unfortunately this is wrong, at least for ELF binaries. Usually if you
> don't have all the dependencies that you expect, it's because they are
> optional and are disabled when they are not found during ./configure.
>
> Thus the correct solution is to add the required -dev packages in the
> Buil
a shell
or system call). As far as I can tell, that won't (and should not by the
name) be picked up by the ${shlibs:Depends} variable. Especially for the
shell call, I don't see an other way than providing it manually.
> Adding manual dependencies on C libraries is almost always wro
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011, Panayiotis Karabassis wrote:
> I am still a little confused about this. Could you provide an
> example/documentation to clarify this? From experience, I believe that
> it WILL expand to LIBRARIES (not executables) that the program needs to
> run, if said libraries are installed
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 04:46:00PM +0200, Panayiotis Karabassis wrote:
> Hi, I have a question regarding pbuilder.
>
> My Debian package uses ${shlibs:Depends} in its Depends field.
>
> However, in a pbuilder environment not all dependencies are installed,
> and hence ${shlibs
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/18/2011 05:57 PM, Paul Gevers wrote:
> I believe that this variable will only resolve libraries which you
> depend on (and you need the -dev package in the build dependencies). It
> will never find a executable which you need to RUN your program.
> My Debian package uses ${shlibs:Depends} in its Depends field.
>
> However, in a pbuilder environment not all dependencies are installed,
> and hence ${shlibs:Depends} does not expand to *all* real dependencies.
I believe that this variable will only resolve libraries which you
de
Reposted from debian-user:
Hi, I have a question regarding pbuilder.
My Debian package uses ${shlibs:Depends} in its Depends field.
However, in a pbuilder environment not all dependencies are installed,
and hence ${shlibs:Depends} does not expand to *all* real dependencies.
My question is: how
Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > Why does building a package with pbuilder generate the seemingly wrong
> > version for Depends: of 2.2.4-4 regarldless that 2.2.5-11.5 is the
> > installed library? What am I doing wrong?
>
> Nothing.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo chroot chroots/stab
Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > Why does building a package with pbuilder generate the seemingly wrong
> > version for Depends: of 2.2.4-4 regarldless that 2.2.5-11.5 is the
> > installed library? What am I doing wrong?
>
> Nothing.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo chroot chroots/stab
Hi,
Bob Proulx wrote:
> dpkg-deb --info /var/cache/pbuilder/result/*.deb |grep Depends:
>Depends: libc6 (>= 2.2.4-4)
>
> So then in an attempt to resolve this I add DISTRIBUTION=woody to my
Why? This libc6 Depends: is fully correct for builds on woody...
> Why does building a package with
.
sudo apt-get install pbuilder
echo 'MIRRORSITE=' > ~/.pbuilderrc # MIRRORSITE= my apt-proxy cache
sudo pbuilder create
cd # some package directory which uses ${shlibs:Depends} in control
grep ^Depends: debian/control
Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}
pdebuild
dpkg-deb --in
Hi,
Bob Proulx wrote:
> dpkg-deb --info /var/cache/pbuilder/result/*.deb |grep Depends:
>Depends: libc6 (>= 2.2.4-4)
>
> So then in an attempt to resolve this I add DISTRIBUTION=woody to my
Why? This libc6 Depends: is fully correct for builds on woody...
> Why does building a package with
.
sudo apt-get install pbuilder
echo 'MIRRORSITE=' > ~/.pbuilderrc # MIRRORSITE= my apt-proxy cache
sudo pbuilder create
cd # some package directory which uses ${shlibs:Depends} in control
grep ^Depends: debian/control
Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}
pdebuild
dpkg-deb --in
>>
>> I am about that it makes the built binary package depending on
>> environment in which is is built. But I think this is acceptable for
>> alpha versions of software, which are more for developers than for
>> normal users, yes?
>
> It is required for all packages that link against shared lib
>>
>> I am about that it makes the built binary package depending on
>> environment in which is is built. But I think this is acceptable for
>> alpha versions of software, which are more for developers than for
>> normal users, yes?
>
> It is required for all packages that link against shared li
On Mon, Jun 24, 2002 at 11:03:30AM +0600, Victor Porton wrote:
> In which situations
>
> Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}
>
> is acceptable and in which is not?
>
> I am about that it makes the built binary package depending on
> environment in which is is built. But I thin
In which situations
Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}
is acceptable and in which is not?
I am about that it makes the built binary package depending on environment in
which is is built. But I think this is acceptable for alpha versions of
software, which are more for developers than for normal users
On Mon, Jun 24, 2002 at 11:03:30AM +0600, Victor Porton wrote:
> In which situations
>
> Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}
>
> is acceptable and in which is not?
>
> I am about that it makes the built binary package depending on
> environment in which is is built. But I thin
In which situations
Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}
is acceptable and in which is not?
I am about that it makes the built binary package depending on environment in
which is is built. But I think this is acceptable for alpha versions of
software, which are more for developers than for normal
Hi!
On Mon, Apr 01, 2002 at 05:10:24PM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> if he compiled with debhelper from potato there is a good chance he would be
> lying about his standards version. The standards-version should match the
> standards you were compiled against.
OK! That's right. I forgot t
Hi!
On Mon, Apr 01, 2002 at 05:10:24PM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> if he compiled with debhelper from potato there is a good chance he would be
> lying about his standards version. The standards-version should match the
> standards you were compiled against.
OK! That's right. I forgot
> > I have been working on a particular package on my workstation, which runs
> > Sid. Now, I was some days away from my office, and had only my laptop
> > (Potato). As my package is not too complicated, I decided to modify it to
> > be built with Potato successfully - As I guessed, it was fairly e
>>
>> - In control, I decreased the standards-version from 3.5.2 to 3.0.1
>
> My question may be stupid, but is it really useful to decrease the
> stardards-version ? I know that potato's lintian issues a warning for
> "newer-standards-version", but it sounds rather pointless when
> backporting a
Hi!
On Mon, Apr 01, 2002 at 04:01:49PM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have been working on a particular package on my workstation, which runs
> Sid. Now, I was some days away from my office, and had only my laptop
> (Potato). As my package is not too complicated, I decided to modify it to
returned error code
> make: *** [binary-indep] Error 1
>
> I have the following information in my Depends:
>
> Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, apache | apache-ssl | httpd, php4, php4-pgsql |
> php\4-mysql, php4-pgsql | mysql-client, postgresql-client | php4-mysql,
> postgresql-\client |
> > I have been working on a particular package on my workstation, which runs
> > Sid. Now, I was some days away from my office, and had only my laptop
> > (Potato). As my package is not too complicated, I decided to modify it to
> > be built with Potato successfully - As I guessed, it was fairly
>>
>> - In control, I decreased the standards-version from 3.5.2 to 3.0.1
>
> My question may be stupid, but is it really useful to decrease the
> stardards-version ? I know that potato's lintian issues a warning for
> "newer-standards-version", but it sounds rather pointless when
> backporting
Hi!
On Mon, Apr 01, 2002 at 04:01:49PM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have been working on a particular package on my workstation, which runs
> Sid. Now, I was some days away from my office, and had only my laptop
> (Potato). As my package is not too complicated, I decided to modify it to
>
> I thought the main problem was this strange combination - I removed it to
> no avail, and fiddled with the line until I got the problem: I removed the
> first dependency (${shlibs:Depends}), and it worked correctly.
>
> I have always seen this thing in the dependencies,
r 1
I have the following information in my Depends:
Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, apache | apache-ssl | httpd, php4, php4-pgsql |
php\4-mysql, php4-pgsql | mysql-client, postgresql-client | php4-mysql,
postgresql-\client | mysql-client
(remember my question a couple of days ago regarding some stran
returned error code
> make: *** [binary-indep] Error 1
>
> I have the following information in my Depends:
>
> Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, apache | apache-ssl | httpd, php4, php4-pgsql |
>php\4-mysql, php4-pgsql | mysql-client, postgresql-client | php4-mysql,
>postgresql-\client |
>
> I thought the main problem was this strange combination - I removed it to
> no avail, and fiddled with the line until I got the problem: I removed the
> first dependency (${shlibs:Depends}), and it worked correctly.
>
> I have always seen this thing in the dependencies,
r 1
I have the following information in my Depends:
Depends: ${shlibs:Depends}, apache | apache-ssl | httpd, php4, php4-pgsql |
php\4-mysql, php4-pgsql | mysql-client, postgresql-client | php4-mysql,
postgresql-\client | mysql-client
(remember my question a couple of days ago regardi
Mike Markley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2001 at 12:20:40PM +0100, Jan-Hendrik Palic wrote:
> > But just .. I have a problem for packaging glibwww and glibwww-ssl.
> > glibwww is an addition for glib and can be compliled with libwww on the
> > one hand and with libwww-ssl and lib
Mike Markley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2001 at 12:20:40PM +0100, Jan-Hendrik Palic wrote:
> > But just .. I have a problem for packaging glibwww and glibwww-ssl.
> > glibwww is an addition for glib and can be compliled with libwww on the
> > one hand and with libwww-ssl and li
On Fri, Nov 16, 2001 at 12:20:40PM +0100, Jan-Hendrik Palic wrote:
> But just .. I have a problem for packaging glibwww and glibwww-ssl.
> glibwww is an addition for glib and can be compliled with libwww on the
> one hand and with libwww-ssl and libssl on the other hand from one
> source.
>
> So I
On Fri, Nov 16, 2001 at 12:20:40PM +0100, Jan-Hendrik Palic wrote:
> But just .. I have a problem for packaging glibwww and glibwww-ssl.
> glibwww is an addition for glib and can be compliled with libwww on the
> one hand and with libwww-ssl and libssl on the other hand from one
> source.
>
> So
Hi ...
On Mon, Oct 29, 2001 at 02:37:25PM +0100, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
>Jan-Hendrik Palic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> subvars:
>Depending on the exact conditions, you should have a file named
>substvars or one or more .substvars files. Was this a
>typo, or is that the source of the problem?
Hi ...
On Mon, Oct 29, 2001 at 02:37:25PM +0100, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
>Jan-Hendrik Palic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> subvars:
>Depending on the exact conditions, you should have a file named
>substvars or one or more .substvars files. Was this a
>typo, or is that the source of the problem?
Jan-Hendrik Palic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> subvars:
Depending on the exact conditions, you should have a file named
substvars or one or more .substvars files. Was this a
typo, or is that the source of the problem?
Maybe try setting DH_VERBOSE=1 ...
--
Robbe
signature.ng
Description: PGP
Jan-Hendrik Palic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> subvars:
Depending on the exact conditions, you should have a file named
substvars or one or more .substvars files. Was this a
typo, or is that the source of the problem?
Maybe try setting DH_VERBOSE=1 ...
--
Robbe
signature.ng
0.2-0)
shlibs.local:
libglibwww 0.2 libglibwww1 (>> 0.2-0), libglibwww1 (<< 0.2-99)
subvars:
shlibs:Depends=libc6 (>= 2.2.4-2), libwww0 (>= 5.3.2-2) | libwww-ssl0
(>= 5.3.2-2), zlib1g (>= 1:1.1.3)
But at dpkg-buildpackage I got:
dh_shlibdeps
dpkg-shlibdeps debian/tmp/usr/
0.2-0)
shlibs.local:
libglibwww 0.2 libglibwww1 (>> 0.2-0), libglibwww1 (<< 0.2-99)
subvars:
shlibs:Depends=libc6 (>= 2.2.4-2), libwww0 (>= 5.3.2-2) | libwww-ssl0
(>= 5.3.2-2), zlib1g (>= 1:1.1.3)
But at dpkg-buildpackage I got:
dh_shlibdeps
dpkg-shlibdeps debian/tmp
OK, thanks for this good piece of advice.
On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 06:10:22PM -0700, Mike Markley wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 04:30:15PM -0800, Britton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spake
> forth:
> >
> > > It actually works with tcl 8.0, 8.1 and 8.2 you are right. So what about :
> > >
> > > Depends:
OK, thanks for this good piece of advice.
On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 06:10:22PM -0700, Mike Markley wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 04:30:15PM -0800, Britton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spake forth:
> >
> > > It actually works with tcl 8.0, 8.1 and 8.2 you are right. So what about :
> > >
> > > Depends: t
Mike Markley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> All in all, "Depends: tclsh | tcl8.2" should generally work [...]
> Note that lintian complains about depending only on a virtual package, and
> while a quick glance doesn't find language in policy which forbids it, that
> is just a quick glance ;).
The
Mike Markley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> All in all, "Depends: tclsh | tcl8.2" should generally work [...]
> Note that lintian complains about depending only on a virtual package, and
> while a quick glance doesn't find language in policy which forbids it, that
> is just a quick glance ;).
Th
On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 04:30:15PM -0800, Britton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spake
forth:
>
> > It actually works with tcl 8.0, 8.1 and 8.2 you are right. So what about :
> >
> > Depends: tcl8.0 | tcl8.1 | tcl8.2
>
> Or mayby just depend on a version greater than 8.0, as you do with
> debhelper in you
> It actually works with tcl 8.0, 8.1 and 8.2 you are right. So what about :
>
> Depends: tcl8.0 | tcl8.1 | tcl8.2
Or mayby just depend on a version greater than 8.0, as you do with
debhelper in you build depend. But Mayby tcl breaks backward
compatability a lot and you thing it would be better
On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 12:05:39PM -0500, Gordon Sadler wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2001 at 03:56:40PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I'm building a package which is a simple tcl script. No binaries. Do I need
> > to
> > Depends: ${shlibs:Depends} ?
> >
>
On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 04:30:15PM -0800, Britton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spake forth:
>
> > It actually works with tcl 8.0, 8.1 and 8.2 you are right. So what about :
> >
> > Depends: tcl8.0 | tcl8.1 | tcl8.2
>
> Or mayby just depend on a version greater than 8.0, as you do with
> debhelper in you
> It actually works with tcl 8.0, 8.1 and 8.2 you are right. So what about :
>
> Depends: tcl8.0 | tcl8.1 | tcl8.2
Or mayby just depend on a version greater than 8.0, as you do with
debhelper in you build depend. But Mayby tcl breaks backward
compatability a lot and you thing it would be better
On Fri, Apr 13, 2001 at 12:05:39PM -0500, Gordon Sadler wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2001 at 03:56:40PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I'm building a package which is a simple tcl script. No binaries. Do I need to
> > Depends: ${shlibs:Depends} ?
> >
> > Or is
On Thu, Apr 12, 2001 at 03:56:40PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm building a package which is a simple tcl script. No binaries. Do I need to
> Depends: ${shlibs:Depends} ?
>
> Or is this fine :
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/debian/s25manager-0.82]$ less debian/contr
I'm building a package which is a simple tcl script. No binaries. Do I need to
Depends: ${shlibs:Depends} ?
Or is this fine :
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/debian/s25manager-0.82]$ less debian/control
Source: s25manager
Section: main/comm
Priority: optional
Maintainer: Eric Van Buggenhaut &l
On Thu, Apr 12, 2001 at 03:56:40PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm building a package which is a simple tcl script. No binaries. Do I need to
> Depends: ${shlibs:Depends} ?
>
> Or is this fine :
>
> [eric@femto:~/debian/s25manager-0.82]$ less debian/control
> So
I'm building a package which is a simple tcl script. No binaries. Do I need to
Depends: ${shlibs:Depends} ?
Or is this fine :
[eric@femto:~/debian/s25manager-0.82]$ less debian/control
Source: s25manager
Section: main/comm
Priority: optional
Maintainer: Eric Van Buggenhaut <[EMAIL P
First of all, PLEASE turn off HTML in your mails.
On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 04:45:52PM -0800, scud wrote:
>when I try to build any debian package the ${shlibs:Depends} statement
>in control file seems not to work. The place in "Depends:" line, where the
>xlib,... should
First of all, PLEASE turn off HTML in your mails.
On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 04:45:52PM -0800, scud wrote:
>when I try to build any debian package the ${shlibs:Depends} statement
>in control file seems not to work. The place in "Depends:" line, where the
>xlib,... should
Hi everybody,
when I try to build any debian package the ${shlibs:Depends} statement
in control file seems not to work. The place in "Depends:" line, where the
xlib,... should be listed, is free. dh_shlibdepends and dh_gencontrol are
present in "rules" file. I'm w
Hi everybody,
when I try to build any debian package the ${shlibs:Depends} statement
in control file seems not to work. The place in "Depends:" line, where the
xlib,... should be listed, is free. dh_shlibdepends and dh_gencontrol are
present in "rules" file. I'm w
k), the package contains
> only python code, so ${shlibs:Depends} is an empty string. And then
> dpkg-deb will complain because the Depends: line ends with a comma (,).
Have a look at the fvwm1 package: in debian/rules I do this (where my
issue was about an empty ${shlibs:Suggests}):
clean:
k), the package contains
> only python code, so ${shlibs:Depends} is an empty string. And then
> dpkg-deb will complain because the Depends: line ends with a comma (,).
>
> Is there a way out of this? I can of course bug the ftp admins
You could use a different control file for m68k, or ap
Is it ok to configure a package differently on one arch?
I want to build solfege with --disable-oss-sound on m68k until
the binutils/glibc problems are fixed.
If I use --disable-oss-sound (only on m68k), the package contains
only python code, so ${shlibs:Depends} is an empty string. And then
dpkg
k), the package contains
> only python code, so ${shlibs:Depends} is an empty string. And then
> dpkg-deb will complain because the Depends: line ends with a comma (,).
Have a look at the fvwm1 package: in debian/rules I do this (where my
issue was about an empty ${shlibs:Suggests}):
clean:
k), the package contains
> only python code, so ${shlibs:Depends} is an empty string. And then
> dpkg-deb will complain because the Depends: line ends with a comma (,).
>
> Is there a way out of this? I can of course bug the ftp admins
You could use a different control file for m68k, or ap
Is it ok to configure a package differently on one arch?
I want to build solfege with --disable-oss-sound on m68k until
the binutils/glibc problems are fixed.
If I use --disable-oss-sound (only on m68k), the package contains
only python code, so ${shlibs:Depends} is an empty string. And then
84 matches
Mail list logo
