Hi,
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 11:19:12PM +0100, Bzzz wrote:
On Sun, 4 Nov 2012 21:52:36 -0500
Michael Gilbert mgilb...@debian.org wrote:
I am not able to reproduce this at all.
Me neither, FWIW.
A ldd on /usr/lib/iceape/libxul.so returns close to 50 libs :(
Please post the output of ldd
Hi Jiff,
we here at the Debian Bug Squashing Party currently taking place at the
Linuxhotel in Essen, Germany tried to replicate your bug.
We are *not* seeing the issue when calling iceape on a regular user's
shell.
which iceape, in our case, returns /usr/bin/iceape (which is a shell
Errm. Sorry. We're not seeing the *same* error message, we're seeing
/usr/lib/iceape/iceape-bin: error while loading shared libraries:
libxul.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory.
Please do perform the checks we asked you to perform in our previous
message - even
On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 01:00:51 +0100
Michael Banck mba...@debian.org wrote:
Hi,
I am not able to reproduce this at all.
Me neither, FWIW.
Weird, I found some quite old posts on other distros about this error
but most of these were due to a pkg compilation error.
I also purged and reinstall
On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 01:09:13 +0100
Stefan Baur newsgroups.ma...@stefanbaur.de wrote:
Hi Jiff,
Hi Stephan und Michael,
we here at the Debian Bug Squashing Party currently taking place at the
Linuxhotel in Essen, Germany tried to replicate your bug.
Hehe, Essen is a nice place.
We are
Am 24.11.2012 01:25, schrieb Bzzz:
we here at the Debian Bug Squashing Party currently taking place at the
Linuxhotel in Essen, Germany tried to replicate your bug.
Hehe, Essen is a nice place.
And so is the Linuxhotel there. ;-)
We are *not* seeing the issue when calling iceape on a
On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 01:34:44 +0100
Stefan Baur newsgroups.ma...@stefanbaur.de wrote:
In the meantime, could you please tell us the output of
echo $PATH (just for completeness)?
It was 'inverted' precisely because of old Freeswitch problems
(conflicts between FS compiled libs system libs):
On Sun, 4 Nov 2012 21:52:36 -0500
Michael Gilbert mgilb...@debian.org wrote:
control: tag -1 unreproducible moreinfo
I am not able to reproduce this at all.
ii linux-image-2. 2.6.39-3~bpo i386 Linux 2.6.39 for modern PCs
ii linux-image-3. 3.2.20-1~bpo i386 Linux 3.2
On Sun, 4 Nov 2012 21:52:36 -0500
Michael Gilbert mgilb...@debian.org wrote:
control: tag -1 unreproducible moreinfo
I am not able to reproduce this at all.
ii linux-image-2. 2.6.39-3~bpo i386 Linux 2.6.39 for modern PCs
ii linux-image-3. 3.2.20-1~bpo i386 Linux 3.2
control: tag -1 unreproducible moreinfo
I am not able to reproduce this at all.
ii linux-image-2. 2.6.39-3~bpo i386 Linux 2.6.39 for modern PCs
ii linux-image-3. 3.2.20-1~bpo i386 Linux 3.2 for modern PCs
I see that you're runnig a backports kernel. Those are quite a bit
10 matches
Mail list logo