On 02 Sep 2002 16:48:05 +0200
I've added the build-dep, but I don't get a versioned binary depend.
Hmm. Come to think of it, why doesn't libd-i have the SONAME in the
package name?
Yes, this is a very badly packaged shared library.
regards,
junichi
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 09:47:22PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
On 02 Sep 2002 16:48:05 +0200
I've added the build-dep, but I don't get a versioned binary depend.
Hmm. Come to think of it, why doesn't libd-i have the SONAME in the
package name?
Yes, this is a very badly
Repository: debian-installer/libdebian-installer
who:sjogren
time: Tue Sep 3 12:52:51 MDT 2002
Log Message:
Name changes: libd-i - libd-i1, libd-i-dev - libd-i1-dev.
Changed SONAME to libd-i.so.1
Files:
changed:Makefile
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Repository: debian-installer/libdebian-installer/debian
who:sjogren
time: Tue Sep 3 12:52:51 MDT 2002
Log Message:
Name changes: libd-i - libd-i1, libd-i-dev - libd-i1-dev.
Changed SONAME to libd-i.so.1
Files:
changed:changelog control rules
removed:
Hello all.
I finally got back from my weekend trip out of town, and finally got
the mess my cats made cleaned up.
Attached is a patch for cdebconf that adds a gtk2.0 frontend. It is
relatively complete. The select and text handlers are not finished,
but there is enough to be tested here. I
On Fri, Aug 23, 2002 at 09:23:51AM -0500, Rolf Brudeseth wrote:
On Thu, Aug 22, 2002 at 10:06:56PM +0300, George Karaolides wrote:
Further to my previous post about the serial port slowing down during
booting, here are the interrupts. It took an hour and a half to get to
a
6 matches
Mail list logo
