On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 06:46:47AM +1000, Rudolph Pereira wrote:
firstly, thanks for the explanation
On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 03:08:23PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
What there is, is on the Ports page, mostly. Keep in mind that there are
(at least) two separate efforts that are being kept
firstly, thanks for the explanation
On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 03:08:23PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
What there is, is on the Ports page, mostly. Keep in mind that there are
(at least) two separate efforts that are being kept track of on here: the
(stagnant?) FreeBSD port, and the (stalled on GCC
On Wed, Apr 30, 2003 at 06:29:18AM +1000, Rudolph Pereira wrote:
On Mon, Apr 28, 2003 at 09:42:16PM +0100, Dan Walrond wrote:
From what I can see, as these ports are meant to be Debian ported to
*BSD the core of the OS should be as much of *BSD as possible. So the
ports should be using the
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 10:36:03AM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 04:37:16PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 02:18:05PM +0100,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now, relativly early on is probably a good time to decide on a
libc to use, especially if
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 10:36:03AM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
I would beg to differ, based on experience with the NetBSD libc. The
things which are required are:
1) Someone who can and will *maintain* the libc package. Said person
should also probably be versed enough in build systems to
On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 05:33:58PM -0400, Nathan Hawkins wrote:
On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 05:13:00PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
that's great news!
If so, please ask him to use 5.0.
why, is 5.0 the latest version?
I have the workstation now. Just have to find time to sort out which
files
Hi All,
can you put these Gigs on anonymous FTP? then i can select the needed
files and take only these from your box.
Not unless a solution can be found for the breakage in /usr/include.
With glibc, I am unable to build a _very_ large number of BSD system
utilities. I was making some
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 04:37:16PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 02:18:05PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now, relativly early on is probably a good time to decide on a libc to use,
especially if packages are distributed in binary form. So it guess it boils
down to
On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 01:36:44PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 05:33:58PM -0400, Nathan Hawkins wrote:
On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 05:13:00PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
that's great news!
If so, please ask him to use 5.0.
why, is 5.0 the latest version?
Yes.
Hi All,
I am trying to compile dpkg on FreeBSD 4.6.2 so that I can get the ball
rolling so to speak. From what I have read on the archives I need to get a
patch for dpkg because the libc for NetBSD at least (and presumably
FreeBSD) does not support obstack. Where can I get this patch? I have
not
On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 08:43:54AM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
As for FreeBSD, I know some chunk of work was done on making it use glibc,
and at least one of the active glibc folks is wanting to get a FreeBSD box
to make sure new things don't break on it.
that's great news!
Nathan, I don't
11 matches
Mail list logo
