Re: help needed with mips build failure

Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > You're using an old (and broken) version of libtool. C.f. > for > Ryan's boilerplate explanation for fixing this problem. Thanks a bunch, this is surely the problem, but applying the s

Re: help needed with mips build failure

On Tue, Feb 15, 2005 at 11:30:00PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: >On Tue, Feb 15, 2005 at 11:22:01PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > >>Can someone with mips and/or libtool expertise examine the build >>failure for gnucash below, and see if they can diagnose the problem? > >>http://buildd.debian.

Re: help needed with mips build failure

Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > You're using an old (and broken) version of libtool. C.f. > > for > > Ryan's boilerplate explanation for fixing this problem. > >

Re: help needed with mips build failure

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Now, it should be noted, upstream uses autoconf 2.13, and libtool > 1.4c. So these errors should not be happening, and seem to imply > problems in the Debian auto* packages. Both are deprecated, outdated crap. Methinks you have some work to do to

Re: tex4ht -- LaTeX and TeX for Hypertext (HTML)

On Wed, Feb 16, 2005 at 09:21:28AM +0530, Kapil Hari Paranjape wrote: > I sent the following mail to debian-mentors and only then realised that > this list (debian-qa) may be the correct place for it. > > I am looking for a sponsor who will help me to adopt tex4ht. > > This package is currently b

Re: help needed with mips build failure

Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > Now, it should be noted, upstream uses autoconf 2.13, and libtool > > 1.4c. So these errors should not be happening, and seem to imply > > problems in the Debian auto* packages. > > Both

Re: help needed with mips build failure

On Wed, Feb 16, 2005 at 12:39:44PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > > Now, it should be noted, upstream uses autoconf 2.13, and libtool > > > 1.4c. So these errors should not be happ

Re: help needed with mips build failure

Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Clearly not, or it wouldn't have failed to build on mips and mipsel. There > is nothing "perfectly working" about that version of libtool, and moreover, > its effects are not limited to the mips architectures -- as the obscenely > long list of library

Re: help needed with mips build failure

[Thomas Bushnell BSG] > Perhaps mips is so rare that they wouldn't get bug reports. Perhaps. http://popcon.debian.org/ > reports: 1 0.02% kfreebsd-i386 1 0.02% ppc64 1 0.02% hurd-i386 2 0.04% mipsel 2 0.04% m68k 2 0.04% arm 4 0.07% mips 4 0.07% s39

Re: help needed with mips build failure

Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Clearly not, or it wouldn't have failed to build on mips and mipsel. There > > is nothing "perfectly working" about that version of libtool, and moreover, > > its effects are not limited to the mips architectures -- as

Re: help needed with mips build failure

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > > Now, it should be noted, upstream uses autoconf 2.13, and libtool > > > 1.4c. So these errors should not be happening, and seem to imp

Re: help needed with mips build failure

Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > As for it being complicated, well, I believe you. But you need not be > upstream to change the build system, I have done that three or four times > already. It is not the most gratifying work in the world, at all... but the > result is fa

Re: Let's remove moria

On Mon, Nov 15, 2004 at 09:42:48AM +1100, Andrew Pollock wrote: [snip] > http://qa.debian.org/orphaned.html and make an upload, I suggest removal as > an alternative. But hey, this is just my personal opinion, I'll happily > accept the consensus. > [snip] Still orphaned. I don't think that th

Re: Let's remove ibcs

On Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 02:57:00PM +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > On Sun, Nov 07, 2004 at 12:47:34AM +1100, Andrew Pollock wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I think ibcs is probably worth getting rid of: > > > > * orphaned (#279770) > > * only really relevant for 2.0 and 2.2 kernels it seems (linux-a

Autor of moria changes to GPL (was: Let's remove moria)

Andrew Pollock: > On Mon, Nov 15, 2004 at 09:42:48AM +1100, Andrew Pollock wrote: > > http://qa.debian.org/orphaned.html and make an upload, > > I suggest removal as > > an alternative. But hey, this is just my personal opinion, I'll happily > > accept the consensus. > > > Still orphaned. > > I