On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 10:59:58AM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 01:52:42AM -0700, David Schleef wrote:
> >
> > To me, the real bug is having N kernel header packages. I'm
> > assuming that they all describe the same binary kernel interface,
> > otherwise packages are forced
On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 01:28:41PM -0700, Matt Brubeck wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Mike Fedyk wrote:
>
> > Do they have different patches applied?
>
> Yes.
>
Are the different arch patches compatible? If so, could all of the
patches be applied; allowing us to create a single headers package
w
On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Mike Fedyk wrote:
> Do they have different patches applied?
Yes.
> If not, then the headers should be the same no matter what the
> ${arch}.
> On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 01:52:42AM -0700, David Schleef wrote:
> > To me, the real bug is having N kernel header packages. I'm
> > assuming that they all describe the same binary kernel interface,
> > otherwise packages are forced depend on a particular type of
> > kernel header. And if they al
On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 01:52:42AM -0700, David Schleef wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 12:53:29AM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> > > The glibc build rules doesn't correctly find the headers installed.
> > > There are bugs filed on this, both on glibc and kernel-headers (for
> > > providing too many)
On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 12:53:29AM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> > The glibc build rules doesn't correctly find the headers installed.
> > There are bugs filed on this, both on glibc and kernel-headers (for
> > providing too many) but I can't find the numbers because brainfood
> > is down.
>
> The g
On Sun, Aug 05, 2001 at 09:58:03PM -0700, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 12:53:29AM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> > > The glibc build rules doesn't correctly find the headers installed.
> > > There are bugs filed on this, both on glibc and kernel-headers (for
> > > providing too m
On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 12:53:29AM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> > The glibc build rules doesn't correctly find the headers installed.
> > There are bugs filed on this, both on glibc and kernel-headers (for
> > providing too many) but I can't find the numbers because brainfood
> > is down.
>
> The g
> The glibc build rules doesn't correctly find the headers installed.
> There are bugs filed on this, both on glibc and kernel-headers (for
> providing too many) but I can't find the numbers because brainfood
> is down.
The glibc rules aren't responsible for "finding" anything. They are
responsibl
On Sat, Aug 04, 2001 at 07:48:43PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> So, wassup?
>
> The ppc build says:
> 2.2.3-8
> should not autobuild this...
Dan got tired of the brokenness? =)
> 2.2.3-7
> won't autobuild -
On Sat, Aug 04, 2001 at 12:57:28PM -0700, David Schleef wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 04, 2001 at 07:48:43PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > So, wassup?
> > The ppc build says:
> > 2.2.3-7
> > won't autobuild - depended on kernel-headers-2.4.5-sparc???
> Because o
So, wassup?
The ppc build says:
2.2.3-8
should not autobuild this...
2.2.3-7
won't autobuild - depended on kernel-headers-2.4.5-sparc???
2.2.3-1
build conflicts fail
12 matches
Mail list logo