Re: glibc 2.3.5-12.1 screwed up on Alpha
[Daniel Jacobowitz] On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 10:42:05PM +0100, Denis Barbier wrote: $ ar p nscd_2.3.5-12.1_alpha.deb control.tar.gz | tar zxf - -O ./control [...] Depends: libc6 (= 2.3.5-12.1) It should depend on libc6.1, like previous versions. Does someone understand what happened? I would check the recent changes to dpkg-shlibdeps first... In fact this is a timestamp problem, debian/control has not been generated on Alpha because it appears after its dependant targets in glibc_2.3.5-12.1.diff.gz. I am afraid that a new upload is needed to fix this mess. Adding a timestamp file in stamp-dir/ looks like a very good idea so that this problem does not occur again. Glibc 2.3.5-12 is in /glibc-package/tags/2.3.5-12/ so it is easy to include 12.1 NMU and this fix in SVN. What is the recommended way? Copy this tag into branches/some-descriptive-name? I will work on this tonight when back at home, unless someone fixes it in the meantime (or tells that I am wrong ;)). Denis -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: glibc 2.3.5-12.1 screwed up on Alpha
On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 11:13:15AM +0100, Denis Barbier wrote: In fact this is a timestamp problem, debian/control has not been generated on Alpha because it appears after its dependant targets in glibc_2.3.5-12.1.diff.gz. I am afraid that a new upload is needed to fix this mess. Adding a timestamp file in stamp-dir/ looks like a very good idea so that this problem does not occur again. Glibc 2.3.5-12 is in /glibc-package/tags/2.3.5-12/ so it is easy to include 12.1 NMU and this fix in SVN. What is the recommended way? Copy this tag into branches/some-descriptive-name? I will work on this tonight when back at home, unless someone fixes it in the meantime (or tells that I am wrong ;)). Either do that, or just do the NMU straight (without touching SVN). Up to you. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: glibc 2.3.5-12.1 screwed up on Alpha
On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 10:42:05PM +0100, Denis Barbier wrote: $ ar p nscd_2.3.5-12.1_alpha.deb control.tar.gz | tar zxf - -O ./control [...] Depends: libc6 (= 2.3.5-12.1) It should depend on libc6.1, like previous versions. Does someone understand what happened? I would check the recent changes to dpkg-shlibdeps first... -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: glibc 2.3.5-12.1 screwed up on Alpha
On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 09:46:41PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 10:42:05PM +0100, Denis Barbier wrote: $ ar p nscd_2.3.5-12.1_alpha.deb control.tar.gz | tar zxf - -O ./control [...] Depends: libc6 (= 2.3.5-12.1) It should depend on libc6.1, like previous versions. Does someone understand what happened? I would check the recent changes to dpkg-shlibdeps first... Ok, resent also to [EMAIL PROTECTED] where changes in dpkg-shlibdeps had been discussed. Denis -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
