> > The ld.so doesn't exist (its part of glibc), but the ldso.deb still
> > exists (But has to be build without ld.so).
>
> Already done IIRC. If so expect it in Incoming this morning.
Think of ldd, it is also in the glibc package, put it out from ld.so.
Hartmut
--
Hartmut Koptein
> > The ld.so doesn't exist (its part of glibc), but the ldso.deb still
> > exists (But has to be build without ld.so).
> Already done IIRC. If so expect it in Incoming this morning.
Will this remove ldconfig.deb and put ldso.deb instead ?
is what is in the new ldso.deb exactly what was in ldcon
On Thu, Jul 23, 1998 at 12:15:54PM +0200, Brederlow wrote:
> The ld.so doesn't exist (its part of glibc), but the ldso.deb still
> exists (But has to be build without ld.so).
Already done IIRC. If so expect it in Incoming this morning.
> Yep, Bugs are normaly unexpected. :)
> dpkg does a chroot
LUTHER Sven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hello,
> > Sven LUTHER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > Hello
> >
> > > is dpkg --root=newroot --force-depends -i packages.deb correct ?
> >
> > Well, better leave out the force-depends.
> >
> How do i explain to dpkg that some packages don't exi
On Wed, Jul 22, 1998 at 02:42:36PM -0700, Joel Klecker wrote:
> At 02:08 -0700 1998-07-20, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> >is dpkg --root=newroot --force-depends -i packages.deb correct ?
>
> cd $newroot && dpkg ... (dpkg uses chroot, but it doesn't chdir to where
> the new root is first)
And on top of tha
At 02:08 -0700 1998-07-20, Sven LUTHER wrote:
>is dpkg --root=newroot --force-depends -i packages.deb correct ?
cd $newroot && dpkg ... (dpkg uses chroot, but it doesn't chdir to where
the new root is first)
>Also what is the status on ldso.deb ? apart from e2fslib and mount it is
>the only vital
On Wed, Jul 22, 1998 at 05:07:04PM +0200, Hartmut Koptein wrote:
> If i'm correct, the maintainer of the ld.so package includes now the
> ldconfig into the ld.so package (again).
>
> We will then make the ld.so package (for ldconfig) and let the ld.so itself
> unavailable for powerpc. But this m
Nice
> We have now a working dpkg!
>
Friendly,
Sven LUTHER
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello,
> > Hartmut Koptein told me there is not supposed to be a ldso.deb on
> > debian/slink/ppc. it is already part of libc6. Who do i believe ? Also i
> am
> > not sure i can compile things on apus, not enough disk space (:<) at
> least
> > until i fix the scsi driver of the blizzard board.
>
>
> Hartmut Koptein told me there is not supposed to be a ldso.deb on
> debian/slink/ppc. it is already part of libc6. Who do i believe ? Also i am
> not sure i can compile things on apus, not enough disk space (:<) at least
> until i fix the scsi driver of the blizzard board.
If i'm correct, the
> > Funny, how do i install the slink libc packages without a working dpkg ?
> > i have
> > only a small hd (~100MB only and no compiler installed)
We have now a working dpkg!
Bye,
Hartmut
--
Hartmut Koptein EMail:
Friedrich-van-Senden-Str. 7
> Also take a look at
> ftp://ftp.infodrom.north.de/pub/Linux/linux-pmac/debian/mklinuxfs.tgz
>
> Thats actually a base.tgz for Debian. You can use that as a base
> before updating to slink. That way you have all the needed files and
Right, that is a 1.99 system (and mklinux).
> PS: Can anyone
Hello,
> Sven LUTHER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Hello
>
> > is dpkg --root=newroot --force-depends -i packages.deb correct ?
>
> Well, better leave out the force-depends.
>
How do i explain to dpkg that some packages don't exist yet ? in particular
libc depends on ld.so who is not suppo
Sven LUTHER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Funny, how do i install the slink libc packages without a working dpkg ?
> i have
> only a small hd (~100MB only and no compiler installed)
The deb files are just ar archives (man ar). ar -x bla.deb gives you
(as well as some other stuff) a data.tar.gz. J
Sven LUTHER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hello
> is dpkg --root=newroot --force-depends -i packages.deb correct ?
Well, better leave out the force-depends.
You also need a workaround for the --root. I will assume the the
newroot is on /mnt/newroot:
mkdir /mnt/newroot/mnt
ln -s / /mnt/newroot/
Hartmut Koptein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I've tried the slink-libc, and it gives me problems with the chown whenever
> > I try to use tar (tried to recompile tar as well).
> >
> > The same thing works fine with both the 980705-snap (which I've built a
> > deb from), and with the redhat gli
> > Native dpkg for powerpc under glibc-2.1 makes trouble! We have a little
> > workaround for this (thanks dan!).
>
> which problem and workaround is this?
The problem ... tja, hmmm ext2 or ar or gzip or
> I've tried the slink-libc, and it gives me problems with the chown whenever
> I t
>
> Make your own tarball. Extract the packages with:
>
> for i in *.deb
> do
> ar -x $i
> tar xfz data.tar.gz
> done
>
> But then you have no dpkg-database.
>
What about preinst, postinst and friends ???
I would give it a try tonight.
Friendly,
Sven LUTHER
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email t
> Should it not be possible to run an hamm/slink mixed system. I think
> this
> is the same as the libc5/libc6 situation on i386 an m68k. should the
> hamm
> libc6 not have been libc5 instead ?
You know that libc5 is incompatible to libc6!? Ok, let me explain:
libc6 (2.0.x) is compatible with glib
Hartmut Koptein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I tried to install slink iun a separate partition, but dpkg was not
> > happy at all.
>
> Native dpkg for powerpc under glibc-2.1 makes trouble! We have a little
> workaround for this (thanks dan!).
which problem and workaround is this?
> > Am i h
> > i tried to install some debian-ppc/slink packages on an linux/apus
> > system where i had previously an mixed redhat/debian-hamm installed.
>
> Hmmm which libc version do you use? 1.99 ? If so, you can't run slink
> binaries.
Should it not be possible to run an hamm/slink mixed system. I thi
> i tried to install some debian-ppc/slink packages on an linux/apus
> system where i had previously an mixed redhat/debian-hamm installed.
Hmmm which libc version do you use? 1.99 ? If so, you can't run slink
binaries.
> I tried to install slink iun a separate partition, but dpkg was not
> happ
Hello
> Now, this is a problem. You can't use that kernel on PPC because the libc
> was compiled with 2.1.106, as I understand it. You're having a variant of
> the chown()/lchown() war. I'm having another one and I don't seem to be
> able to get rid of it :)
23 matches
Mail list logo
