> > > > make3.79.1-10 testing
> > > ^
> > > exactly what I rebuilt today...
> > >
> > > > libc6 2.2.4-7 testing
> > > > fileutils 4.1-9 testing
> > >
> > > I can't check (box at work), but probably exactly the same. The
This electronic message is not binding on its sender nor on Cetrel S.C.
Any use of information of this mail except the use by the addressee
within his or her business relation with Cetrel is strictly forbidden
CETREL S.C. L-2956 Luxembourg; Tel: 00352 35566-1; http://www.cetrel.lu
> > make3.79.1-10 testing
> ^
> exactly what I rebuilt today...
>
> > libc6 2.2.4-7 testing
> > fileutils 4.1-9 testing
>
> I can't check (box at work), but probably exactly the same. These
I recall a new build of ma
On Mon, 2002-01-07 at 14:00, Michel Lanners wrote:
> OK, I tried other memory DIMMs: no dice. I then tried to recompile make
> locally: that worked! (rebuilt the .deb, in fact).
A few weeks ago, after a dist-upgrade, I was getting just segfaults from
gnome-session. I tried debugging it, but it wa
On 7 Jan, this message from Michel Dänzer echoed through cyberspace:
> On Mon, 2002-01-07 at 20:00, Michel Lanners wrote:
>> So, the question that remains is: why on earth am I the only that one
>> whose make segfaults when building kernels? What is wrong (if anything)
>> with woody's make packag
On Mon, 2002-01-07 at 20:00, Michel Lanners wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> >>> I'd run the command that segfaults directly, if I knew which one? Hm,
> >>> make -n comes to mind... I'll have to see what that gives.
> >>
> >> -n won't do anything so I'm not sure it'll act just as make (in case
> >> targets
Hey all,
>>> I'd run the command that segfaults directly, if I knew which one? Hm,
>>> make -n comes to mind... I'll have to see what that gives.
>>
>> -n won't do anything so I'm not sure it'll act just as make (in case
>> targets get updated). Add a few echo "yadda" around the makefile to see
>
7 matches
Mail list logo
