On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 02:30:24PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 12:50:08PM +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote:
> >
> > i just downloaded the vim source package, and will try building it. I
> > suppose
> > the binutrils package in experimental is :
> >
> > binutils_2.9.5.0.10-0
On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 02:39:17PM -0400, Kevin Puetz wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > Ok, i will look into that, and check it. I don't have a mach64 though
> > so i will not be able to test it, just build the package. Should we
> > forward this stuff to debian-x mailing list ?
>
> I have
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Ok, i will look into that, and check it. I don't have a mach64 though
> so i will not be able to test it, just build the package. Should we
> forward this stuff to debian-x mailing list ?
I have one, so I can test - assuming this is the mach64 code for XF86_FBDev,
not
On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 12:50:08PM +0200, Sven LUTHER wrote:
>
> i just downloaded the vim source package, and will try building it. I suppose
> the binutrils package in experimental is :
>
> binutils_2.9.5.0.10-0.1_powerpc.deb, somewhat older than the current binutils.
> Will apt not complain ab
On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 01:23:46PM +0200, Hartmut Koptein wrote:
> > > > Should i upload the X package i will build, or will the autobuilder
> > > > take care of it ?
> > >
> > > Upload it.
> >
> > Ok, i will do it. What is the problem with the mach64 stuff ? any relation
> > with
> > the sparc
> > > Should i upload the X package i will build, or will the autobuilder
> > > take care of it ?
> >
> > Upload it.
>
> Ok, i will do it. What is the problem with the mach64 stuff ? any relation
> with
> the sparc mach64 stuff recently added to the package ?
Yes, it is a problem with Ben's pat
On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 12:44:24PM +0200, Hartmut Koptein wrote:
> > Should i upload the X package i will build, or will the autobuilder
> > take care of it ?
>
> Upload it.
Ok, i will do it. What is the problem with the mach64 stuff ? any relation with
the sparc mach64 stuff recently added to th
> Should i upload the X package i will build, or will the autobuilder
> take care of it ?
Upload it.
> Also i noticed the following bug too :
>
> bahs$ vim
> BUG IN DYNAMIC LINKER ld.so: dl-runtime.c: 67: fixup: Assertion
> `((reloc->r_info) & 0xff) == 21' failed!
>
> Is it the same bug, or sh
On Tue, Sep 14, 1999 at 10:14:05AM +0200, Hartmut Koptein wrote:
> > I upgraded gcc to version 2.95.1-2 and I cannot build any binaries.
> >
> > This is error messages.
> > ---
> > /usr/bin/ld: unrecognised emulation mode: elf32ppclinux
> > Supported emulations: elf32ppc
>
> I upgraded gcc to version 2.95.1-2 and I cannot build any binaries.
>
> This is error messages.
> ---
> /usr/bin/ld: unrecognised emulation mode: elf32ppclinux
> Supported emulations: elf32ppc
> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> ---
>
> So I c
Oh, This problem already discussed in last week. I installed binutils
2.9.5.0.10-0.1 from project/experimental/ and it works correctly.
> This is error messages.
> ---
> /usr/bin/ld: unrecognised emulation mode: elf32ppclinux
> Supported emulations: elf32ppc
> collect2: ld
Hello,
I upgraded gcc to version 2.95.1-2 and I cannot build any binaries.
This is error messages.
---
/usr/bin/ld: unrecognised emulation mode: elf32ppclinux
Supported emulations: elf32ppc
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
---
So I checked gcc's
12 matches
Mail list logo
