Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
Are there any problem in uploading packages built inside that chroot?
It should be fine. In fact that is a recommended practice. It
prevents flavor from the developer's machine leaking into the build.
The 'pbuilder' package is very nice for managing these types of
The machine I used to create debian packages ceased to work last week.
The only machine I have ATM to do debian work is an amd64 box with the
unofficial port of debian. I've set up an ia32 chroot in which I set
up an i386 debian unstable.
Are there any problem in uploading packages built inside
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 04:58:15PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
The machine I used to create debian packages ceased to work last week.
The only machine I have ATM to do debian work is an amd64 box with the
unofficial port of debian. I've set up an ia32 chroot in which I set
up an i386
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07.07.2005, at 19:56, Geert Stappers wrote:
If you have a non ia32 system, then show that and be proud of it.
Well at least it should not be possible to upload amd64 binary
packages to the main Debian incoming as the port is unknown to katie.
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 10:03:02PM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07.07.2005, at 19:56, Geert Stappers wrote:
If you have a non ia32 system, then show that and be proud of it.
Well at least it should not be possible to upload amd64 binary
On 08/07/05, Stefano Zacchiroli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The machine I used to create debian packages ceased to work last week.
The only machine I have ATM to do debian work is an amd64 box with the
unofficial port of debian. I've set up an ia32 chroot in which I set
up an i386 debian
On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 19:56 +0200, Geert Stappers wrote:
So, you are worried.
Worried about not being i386 enough.
I say: Screw i386 !
Fine to say that, but Ubuntu is screaming ahead of Debian
here -- they actually support amd64, Debian doesn't.
--
John Skaller skaller at users dot
7 matches
Mail list logo
