* Wesley J. Landaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-06-20 18:46]:
package from ia64 for now...
I was hoping that the underlying bug in ld would get fixed and that this
would start working again, as it has in the past. Otherwise, yes, perhaps
it just needs to be removed from ia64.
I'm not sure
On 19/10/06 at 09:40 +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
* Wesley J. Landaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-10-18 20:17]:
Hmmm... I'll see if upstream can help with this, but it can almost
guarantee
it won't be in time for etch. (It's doubtful upstream has an IA64 to test
on).
In this case I
On Wednesday 20 June 2007 00:22:34 Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
On 19/10/06 at 09:40 +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
* Wesley J. Landaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-10-18 20:17]:
Hmmm... I'll see if upstream can help with this, but it can almost
guarantee it won't be in time for etch. (It's doubtful
* Wesley J. Landaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-10-18 20:17]:
Hmmm... I'll see if upstream can help with this, but it can almost guarantee
it won't be in time for etch. (It's doubtful upstream has an IA64 to test
on).
In this case I suggest you get the ia64 binary removed and downgrade
this
ghdl_0.24+gcc4.1.1-1 can be compiled with a current version of sid.
So it seems pretty clear this bug is due to a change from 0.24 to
0.25.
--
Martin Michlmayr
http://www.cyrius.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
On Wednesday 18 October 2006 03:39, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
ghdl_0.24+gcc4.1.1-1 can be compiled with a current version of sid.
So it seems pretty clear this bug is due to a change from 0.24 to
0.25.
Hmmm... I'll see if upstream can help with this, but it can almost guarantee
it won't be in
6 matches
Mail list logo
