reopen 463795 retitle 463795 dsniff: FTBFS on etch tag 463795 etch thanks On 29/02/2008, Klaus Ethgen wrote: > The problem still exists. The package is unbuildable (with the build > dependencies in the package). Maybe you miss some of them?
Nope… > Maybe you have build dependencies to special gcc version? I have: > > gcc --version > gcc (GCC) 4.1.2 20061115 (prerelease) (Debian 4.1.1-21) > > which is the default in stable. (This is the reason why I need to > recompile it as you did compile it with a glibc which is not > compatible with stable (2.4) kernel.) … but I didn't catch the rebuild happened on stable (although one might have induced it from the APT pinning, but stating explicitely the build environment is always preferred, i.e. at least suite + arch). > However, if you need a special gcc version or a other special > version of one library, please note them in build dependencies. Note that I'm not the maintainer of the package, I was just walking the list of RC bugs. I'm not sure how to handle such a bug, anyway. Let's tag it “etch”, that should do the trick, so that it no longer appears on the list of RC bugs for the next release, and so that people working on fixing RC bugs on stable can identify it at first glance (but I guess people are more actively working on fixing RC bugs for the next stable release). Thanks for clarifying. Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois
pgpgHHHL4mVWo.pgp
Description: PGP signature
