This makes oprofile link statically against libbfd, again, by merging in the Debian NMU that did the same thing: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=537744 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=573905 This will make future rebuilds against new binutils unnecessary for good.
I built this in my PPA <https://launchpad.net/~anders- kaseorg/+archive/ppa>, checked that it no longer depends a specific version of binutils, and successfully tested it with the instructions at <http://nouveau.freedesktop.org/wiki/OProfile>. ** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #537744 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=537744 ** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #573905 http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=573905 ** Patch added: "oprofile_0.9.6-1ubuntu10_lp588033.debdiff" https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/oprofile/+bug/588033/+attachment/1558469/+files/oprofile_0.9.6-1ubuntu10_lp588033.debdiff ** Also affects: oprofile (Debian) via http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=537744 Importance: Unknown Status: Unknown ** Changed in: oprofile (Ubuntu) Status: New => Confirmed ** Summary changed: - oprofile needs rebuilding against binutils 2.20.51.20100710 + oprofile should not link libbfd dynamically, again [oprofile needs rebuilding against binutils 2.20.51.20100710] -- oprofile should not link libbfd dynamically, again [oprofile needs rebuilding against binutils 2.20.51.20100710] https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/588033 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Registry Administrators, which is the registrant for Debian. _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~registry Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~registry More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
