mklibs fails to find the PIC library for reduction since it's called
libnewt-utf8_pic.a while mklibs expects it to simply be libnewt_pic.a
We're using newt debian-installer so it'd be nice if this were fixed so
we could save some bytes on the boot media. :-)
I have a few
* Sebastian Ley wrote:
As for now no udebs actually have their soname number as part of the
package name. It is libc-udeb, discover-udeb...
Hm, no one talking to me, so I just reply myself...:
What actually happens if there is an ABI change in one of the library
udebs? Let us say a new
[I have set Mail-Followup-To; please To/CC me on replies.]
Hi guys,
Over here at Progeny we're wondering about the feasibility of using
udebs in resource-constrained environments for more than just
installation.
How feasible would it be to use udebs as real packages? I note that
udpkg appears
#include hallo.h
* Lee Adamson [Wed, Feb 26 2003, 06:47:31PM]:
When the box reboots after initial base system install, a boottime
keymap is loaded that seems to cause my old 88 key adb keyboard to be
mapped wrong (using the qwerty/us keymap).
The solution I have found is to use the shell on
tor 2003-02-27 klockan 17.34 skrev Branden Robinson:
[I have set Mail-Followup-To; please To/CC me on replies.
How feasible would it be to use udebs as real packages? I note that
udpkg appears to support maintainer scripts, though I don't know it
supports them as comprehensively as regular
On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 06:36:08PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
When the box reboots after initial base system install, a boottime
keymap is loaded that seems to cause my old 88 key adb keyboard to be
mapped wrong (using the qwerty/us keymap).
Could anyone prove this and tell the exact reason
On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 06:56:09PM +0100, Martin Sj?gren wrote:
I'm not quite sure what it is you are asking. Are you asking for how
nifty things you can do with udpkg? Right now, udpkg only calls
/.../package.config configure
/.../package.postinst configure
and that's it. I don't see how
Has anyone looked at the ipkg (sp?) format used on Compaq iPaqs?
Its an cut-down dpkg format for embedded use.
(I've just heard of it, not investigated it. A comparison by someone who
knows both, and the debate over dpkg v2, would be nice).
Regards,
Alastair
On Thu, 2003-02-27 at 17:56,
Hi!
I was trying out the Sarge-i386-businesscard.iso (40MB iso image).
http://gluck.debian.org/cdimage/testing/netinst/i386/sarge-i386-businesscard.iso
What's the gluck stand for? Good Luck?
I burned the iso image and booted into the install process with this CD,
but did
not succeed
Hi
As some of you are already aware, there's a problem wrt m68k in that
there's no decent 2.4 kernel for m68k yet. As such, creating an m68k
debian-installer image that actually works is a bit problematic right
now, since debian-installer depends on DevFS quite a lot, while DevFS
will only be
On 27 Feb 2003 18:56:09 +0100
Martin Sjögren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Another approach we're thinking about is regular dpkg support for
directory exclusion during package unpack, for things like
documentation and localization files. Of course, that's more an
issue for debian-dpkg... :)
Branden Robinson wrote:
Another approach we're thinking about is regular dpkg support for
directory exclusion during package unpack, for things like documentation
and localization files. Of course, that's more an issue for
debian-dpkg... :)
Please Progeny guys, make everyone's day and do
Hi.
I was sort of annoyed by nano not working in debian-installer.
The result is the attached patch, which changes this.
As I'm just a random user of nano in debian-installer initrd, you probably want
to wait what someone of the debian-installer team has to say about this.
Especially, I don't know
Glenn McGrath wrote:
udebs are a technical solution to a social problem
Not entirely. I avoided some picky policy stuff with udebs, but as much
of the idea was to make sure that the stuff used by the installer did
not bloat the main packages lists, and to make sure nobody would install
it by
Your message dated Thu, 27 Feb 2003 15:44:13 -0800
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#182436: some small problems with debian-installer
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the
15 matches
Mail list logo
