Hi,
On Wed, Jul 04, 2012 at 07:54:27PM -0600, Philipp Kern wrote:
> Aurelien,
>
> thanks for informing us.
>
> On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 12:08:06AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > As a consequence the armhf value will have to be changed in the future,
> > which might have some side effects.
>
>
On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 12:08:06AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>Hi,
>
>At the end of last year the patch unsubmitted-ldconfig-cache-abi.diff
>has been added, but has not been submitted upstream despite asking a few
>times. This patch provides correct ldconfig support for systems with
>both armel a
Aurelien,
thanks for informing us.
On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 12:08:06AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> As a consequence the armhf value will have to be changed in the future,
> which might have some side effects.
What kind of side effects might happen? I.e. is it likely to break pure armhf
systems
Hi,
At the end of last year the patch unsubmitted-ldconfig-cache-abi.diff
has been added, but has not been submitted upstream despite asking a few
times. This patch provides correct ldconfig support for systems with
both armel and armhf libraries.
The situation is now that this patch breaks MIPS
4 matches
Mail list logo