Bug#156841: glibc_2.2.5-13(alpha/unstable): FTBFS: non-PIC code in a dynamic lib

2002-08-15 Thread Jack Howarth
Ryan, This doesn't fit with bug #155606 as far as I can tell. That bug would only occur when a glibc is built with a gcc >= 3.1 and the build log for alpha claims that gcc 2.95.4 was used. Also, on ppc we never see any breakage in the glibc build itself when gcc 3.2 is used. Rather when you ins

Bug#156841: glibc_2.2.5-13(alpha/unstable): FTBFS: non-PIC code in a dynamic lib

2002-08-15 Thread Ryan Murray
Package: glibc Version: 2.2.5-13 Severity: serious There was an error while trying to autobuild your package: > Automatic build of glibc_2.2.5-13 on lully by sbuild/alpha 1.169 > Build started at 20020815-1511 [...] > ** Using build dependencies supplied by package: > Build-Depe

Bug#156826: locales should generate a locales by default

2002-08-15 Thread Guillaume Morin
Package: locales Version: 2.2.5-13 Severity: wishlist I maintain a package which needs a generated locale to run its own internal testsuite. I'd like to build-depends on it. But, unless I am mistaken, the locales package does not generate any locales by default. Therefore I'd like to know if it

Re: how to find symbols needed for libgcc-compat in glibc

2002-08-15 Thread Jack Howarth
Actually Jakub sent me the following e-mail just a few moments ago... -- On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 08:28:18AM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote: > Jakub, >Can I assume you actually checked all the other > arches that redhat has shipped a linux fo

Re: how to find symbols needed for libgcc-compat in glibc

2002-08-15 Thread Martin v. Loewis
Jack Howarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > It is unclear how many arches have been checked at this point other > than ia64 and ppc; I am assuming i386 must be okay. It's an issue on i386 as well. Regards, Martin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". T

Re: [SECURITY] [DSA 149-1] New glibc packages fix security relatedproblems

2002-08-15 Thread Wolfram Gloger
> BTW, why can you say 'with a performance improvement'? > I wonder this from looking at this patch and from upstream > discussion (including you :). I meant "relative to the orignal patch". The original patch always did a non-constant division to check for overflow. Such a division is very exp

Bug#156821: Patches for LSB 1.2 compliance

2002-08-15 Thread Anthony Towns
Package: libc6 Version: 2.2.5-10 Severity: normal Tags: patch, woody, sarge, sid Severity normal since most of these fix real bugs, even if you'd never notice them normally. First is that the LSB test suite requires a bunch of currencies that the Euro obsoleted to be available. See Q2.3 in ht

Re: 2seks

2002-08-15 Thread HASO YouR
Hic bir yerde bulup izleyemeyeceginiz icerigi size http://www.2seks.com sunuyor. TURK VE AVRUPALI AMATOR KIZLAR BULGAR KIZLARI ROMEN HATUNLAR TURK TECAVUZ FILMLERI KIZLAR YURDU ALMANYA'NIN SAPIK HATUNLARI OTELDEKI GIZLI KAMERALAR VE DAHASI... Hepsi orjinal ve kaliteli kayitlar. Hemen gi

[installer@ftp-master.debian.org: db1-compat_2.1.3-4_i386.changes ACCEPTED]

2002-08-15 Thread Colin Watson
Hi, It should be safe to make libc depend on this now, in order to pull in libdb.so.2. -- Colin Watson [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] - Forwarded message from Debian Installer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - From: Debian Installer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Colin Watson <[EMA

how to find symbols needed for libgcc-compat in glibc

2002-08-15 Thread Jack Howarth
Hi, I am not filing a bug on this right now, but you should all be aware that any arch that wants to switch to gcc 3.2 as its default compiler will need to address the following issue. The libgcc symbols starting in gcc 3.1 are now .hidden which means breakage of old binaries occurs when gcc 3.