On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 11:33:38PM -0400, Albert Cahalan wrote:
> On 5/28/07, Charles Plessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Le Mon, May 28, 2007 at 07:52:42PM -0400, Albert Cahalan a écrit :
> >>
> >> 1. you actually ARE cross compiling
> >> 2. you didn't tell the package that (via make arguments, e
On Tue, May 29, 2007 at 08:56:56PM -0400, Albert Cahalan wrote:
> On 5/29/07, Paul Mackerras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Albert Cahalan writes:
> >
> >> Running a 32-bit userspace on a 64-bit kernel is
> >> however gross, foul, bad, nasty, and wrong.
> >
> >Rubbish. It makes a lot of sense for m
On 5/29/07, Paul Mackerras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Albert Cahalan writes:
> Running a 32-bit userspace on a 64-bit kernel is
> however gross, foul, bad, nasty, and wrong.
Rubbish. It makes a lot of sense for most userspace programs to be
32-bit on a 64-bit PowerPC system. Unless a program
Albert Cahalan writes:
> Running a 32-bit userspace on a 64-bit kernel is
> however gross, foul, bad, nasty, and wrong.
Rubbish. It makes a lot of sense for most userspace programs to be
32-bit on a 64-bit PowerPC system. Unless a program needs to do
64-bit integer arithmetic or access more tha
On 5/20/07, Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sat, May 19, 2007 at 04:46:04PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Out of the 140 packages using ./configure, 30 used ppc64, but only one
> faild to build for this reason.
These .configure thingies, are they using the gnu autoconf stuff, and i
On 5/28/07, Charles Plessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Le Mon, May 28, 2007 at 07:52:42PM -0400, Albert Cahalan a écrit :
>
> 1. you actually ARE cross compiling
> 2. you didn't tell the package that (via make arguments, etc.)
Hi,
does it mean that there is something broken in the concept of a D
Le Mon, May 28, 2007 at 07:52:42PM -0400, Albert Cahalan a écrit :
>
> 1. you actually ARE cross compiling
> 2. you didn't tell the package that (via make arguments, etc.)
Hi,
does it mean that there is something broken in the concept of a Debian
port? When I install a "Debian Etch for powerpc"
On 5/20/07, Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sat, May 19, 2007 at 04:46:04PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Out of the 140 packages using ./configure, 30 used ppc64, but only one
> faild to build for this reason.
These .configure thingies, are they using the gnu autoconf stuff, and i
Hi all, hi Sven,
Le Sun, May 20, 2007 at 12:27:12PM +0200, Sven Luther a écrit :
>
> These .configure thingies, are they using the gnu autoconf stuff, and if
> so which version. Or some hand-made ./configure script ?
I do not know... À vrai dire, my motivation to investigate further
decreased s
On Sat, May 19, 2007 at 04:46:04PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Fri, May 18, 2007 at 07:37:07AM +0200, Sven Luther a écrit :
> >
> > Do you know what exactly is causing this problem ? Or could you list the
> > 140 packages which you already detected to be problematic ?
>
> Hi Sven,
>
> Out
Le Fri, May 18, 2007 at 07:37:07AM +0200, Sven Luther a écrit :
>
> Do you know what exactly is causing this problem ? Or could you list the
> 140 packages which you already detected to be problematic ?
Hi Sven,
Out of the 140 packages using ./configure, 30 used ppc64, but only one
faild to bui
Le Fri, May 18, 2007 at 07:26:06PM +1000, jim a écrit :
> sorry in advance if i have missed the point - but this might be relevant ;)
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=251149
Thanks all for your answers, it seems that linux32 is the solution.
However, I remain puzzled by the fa
Charles Plessy wrote:
Dear all,
Starting from the observation that a pre-release debian pacakge of
root-system and the current xaralx (non-free) pacakge fail to build
from source on G5 powerpc machines but not on G4, I started to get
worried that that kind of failures would be more widespread.
Charles Plessy a écrit :
> Dear all,
>
> Starting from the observation that a pre-release debian pacakge of
> root-system and the current xaralx (non-free) pacakge fail to build
> from source on G5 powerpc machines but not on G4, I started to get
> worried that that kind of failures would be more
On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 12:13:34PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Starting from the observation that a pre-release debian pacakge of
> root-system and the current xaralx (non-free) pacakge fail to build
> from source on G5 powerpc machines but not on G4, I started to get
> worried th
Dear all,
Starting from the observation that a pre-release debian pacakge of
root-system and the current xaralx (non-free) pacakge fail to build
from source on G5 powerpc machines but not on G4, I started to get
worried that that kind of failures would be more widespread.
The core of the problem
16 matches
Mail list logo
