have. They will, among other things, install libc6-dev-i386. For
example, on a current wheezy system, you will see the following dependency
chain:
gcc-multilib -> gcc-4.7-multilib -> libc6-dev-i386
but also various other things like lib32gcc1.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
function. But this is very
much a question of style, not of correctness.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Russ Allbery writes:
> Yeah. But I suspect it was a mistaken statement. The subject line from
> the referenced comp.lang.c thread was:
> c99 and the lack of warnings when int operations are applied to a bool
> which I think is best caught by the conversion *to* bool when the
her than the conversion *from* bool to perform the
operation.
I could see the other direction being marginally helpful in catching
people adding bools together, which may not make a lot of sense, but it
doesn't seem as likely to cause bugs.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@stanford.edu) <
arithmetic on void *
pointers -- code like that is possibly a sign that there's something
flawed with the algorithm and it should be rewritten to treat booleans as
actual booleans. (For example, b++ could easily wrap, and unexpectedly
fast depending on the size of bool on a platform.)
--
Russ Al
bian and Ubuntu are
pursuing a direction that we think is more comprehensive and will provide
a lot of long-term benefit, but I think it's fair to say that the jury is
still out on whether that was the right tradeoff to take.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Andreas Schwab writes:
> Russ Allbery writes:
>> For example, suppose I'm doing development on an amd64 box targeting
>> armel and I want to use Kerberos libraries in my armel application.
>> I'd like to be able to install the armel Kerberos libraries on my
Ian Lance Taylor writes:
> Russ Allbery writes:
>> The reason, for the record, is because Debian wants to be able to
>> support multiarch with more than two architectures. The /lib32
>> vs. /lib64 distinction doesn't allow one to use the same underlying
>>
doing development in a cross-compiled environment. The general
/lib/ layout allows you to install packages from as many
different architectures as you desire.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
on-software license for the sort of material distributed in
Debian is an artificial and meaningless distinction because of, among
other reasons, exactly the use case being discussed in this thread.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
distributable (and dual-licensing would resolve that, obviously),
I don't believe Debian would have a problem with the situation that you
describe.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
t -- this specific case is not a problem that anyone needs to try to
solve. I describe it in this much detail just so that people are aware of
the sort of challenges that the policy creates and that contributors need
to work through.
Please also note that much of this information is about ten years old, and
the situation may have changed somewhat.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
ly in contracts. Even if your contract with your employer says
absolutely nothing about copyright, work done for hire for your employer
is still owned by that employer. I believe the contract would have to
explicitly say that this is *not* the case for you to be able to retain
ownership of copyri
lot about project management and approval processes
and the like, and I really appreciate people doing that in public where
others can learn from it.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
il. Given that, on-topic or not, I think it's hardly
surprising for the issue to come up here. The most effective way to keep
it from coming up here would seem to be for them to start answering their
e-mail.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
elease.
I personally don't care of the GPLv3 change gets a major version number
change or a minor one, but please make the first 4.3 release 4.3.0, and
please maintain the convention that the next minor release after 4.2.1 is
4.2.2. Anything else is needlessly confusing IMO and raises po
d not just the one file.) The original
> data were rm-ed and replaced with a new pull of the Ada code.
Yup, I've seen change of capitalization of a single letter in files due to
bad disk sectors before, even on relatively modern hardware. It's a
single bit error, so it's an ex
mane.org/dist.php
> The bits I checked were under the GPL.
Yup, last time I checked all of Gmane was running on free software. The
underlying news server is INN, and Lars was making available all the bits
he's running on top of it to do all the fun interface stuff.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMA
of system RAM. svn itself doesn't need anywhere
near as much.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
no such arguments, but libiberty
> has a wider scope than just gcc.
dig -t txt proxy-service.best.stanford.edu @leland-ns0
comes to mind.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
ses", and found gcc 4.0
and 4.0.1.
> The list of releases on the releases page ends at 3.4.4. Every other
> link Ive chased down stops at 3.4.4.
Could you say exactly what pages you looked at? It's hard to fix the
problem from the amount of information that you&#x
hough,
not a fundamental problem. (Another difficulty is that presenting a login
screen and inviting people to create an account also implies that if you
weren't already invited to create an account, someone might be upset if
you just make one. It has a very "members only" sort of feel to it.)
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
hings that can't really be discussed well in negatives. I really
appreciated your links above to the other sites that you think are better
laid-out; that's positive and presenting a particular improvement that can
then be discussed. In general, though, I think it's going to take someone
mocking something up and saying "here, I think this is better, what do
other people think?"
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
lling to put
the effort into it.
Personally, I think they're doing a great job. But maybe I just have a
tin eye for web site design too -- it's certainly possible. I'm not
prejudging your argument that the web site could be better, just saying
that saying so on the mailin
is an extra
(unsigned) key for Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on the keyservers that
I had nothing to do with.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
ul in practice than -ansi is. It's
really obnoxious to have to define some preprocessor variable just to be
able to get an fdopen() prototype out of , even if I can see how
it would be theoretically useful.
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
if you or someone else would
implement this. Various people have requested over the years that some of
the packages I maintain compile cleanly with a C++ compiler, and while I
can test such compiles with special effort, being able to integrate the
warnings about it into my normal make warnings build wo
Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On May 16, 2005, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> And package maintainers will never take cross-compilation seriously
>> even if they really want to because they, for the most part, can't test
>> it.
sed in cross-build environments and receive active regular testing by
people who are part of the development team (like gcc).
--
Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
29 matches
Mail list logo
