On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 07:16:52PM +0100, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote: > There left only a few things todo in dependencies area (and much more in > other > areas) > > all arches: > bd: lilypond-2.2.4-2: req libkpathsea.so.3.4.5 not found > - I'm going to put all ghostscripts we have into ac (if they will compile)
At least -esp from HEAD does. > bd: dotnet-gtk-sharp-gnome-1.0.10-4: req gtkhtml = 3.8.1 version mismatch > bd: dotnet-gtk-sharp2-gnome-2.5.91-3: req gtkhtml = 3.8.1 version mismatch > - what's the problem here exactly with athlon? Unfortunately I no longer have > athlon machine and I don't have access to ac-athlon. Probably kernel problem on builder (2.6.8/amd64 with 32-bit userspace). > ppc: > bd: mono-tools-1.1.9-2: req mono(mscorlib) = 2.0.3600.0 version mismatch ? Didn't mono-tools-1.1.10-2 build on ppc? buildlog? > alpha: > bd: autopano-sift-2.3-1: req dotnet-gtk-sharp >= 1.0 not found 2.4-2 with EA already in ac-ready > amd64: > bd: avifile-lame_audioenc-0.7.38-8: req libmp3lame.so.0 not found fixed in avifile.spec on HEAD > bd: libstdc++32-3.3.6-3: req libc.so.6 not found > - tons of these due to multilib so the question arrives. What we do with > multilib glibc, gcc and so on - qboosh? Does it go into Ac or not? IMO it should. The same in our limited sparc64 port. (BTW: I'm not the one who introduced multilib on ac-amd64 (I just made it possible), so I'm not the only person to ask) > The kernels: > - is kernel24.spec ready on all architectures, qboosh? Yes, 2.4.32-2 already in ac-ready (incl. sparc64; still no amd64 - nobody cared). The question is routes patch (2.4.32-2 has the patch applied, HEAD disabled) - which version should go to Ac (I'd prefer not to change it after Ac release). As I don't have a strong opinion here, I'm asking now - does anyone need this patch? -- Jakub Bogusz http://qboosh.cs.net.pl/ _______________________________________________ pld-devel-en mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
