Package: libc6-dbg
Version: 2.7-15
Severity: normal
It looks like the symbols for all three of libc6, libc6-amd64, and
libc6-i686 are included in this package. Combined with the fixing of
#516516, this results (well, will result, for me) in a quite large
package, parts of which may be quite
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 4:12 AM, Aurelien Jarno aurel...@aurel32.net wrote:
Yes, debugging packages in Debian are all using the same layout: one per
source package. A lot of them are a lot bigger than libc6-dbg.
Wouldn't it be better to split the symbols for libc6-foo into a
seperate
On Fri, Nov 17, 2006 at 10:58:53AM +0100, Kristian Nielsen wrote:
My understanding of ld.so is unfortunately limited, but perhaps the problem is
related to missing libpthread.so.0 symbolic links?
Nope. There are three separate builds of glibc: one with LinuxThreads
and no debug, one with
Package: libc-bin
Version: 2.13-24
Severity: normal
File: /sbin/ldconfig
Lately, whenever the ldconfig trigger runs, I see a warning like this:
ldconfig: /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6.0.16-gdb.py is not an ELF file
- it has the wrong magic bytes at the start.
The file in question is
Package: libc6
Version: 2.13-35
Severity: normal
Dear Maintainer,
I'm a little puzzled here:
Based on this help:
,[ LD_DEBUG=help /bin/true ]
| Valid options for the LD_DEBUG environment variable are:
|
| libsdisplay library search paths
Package: libc6-dev
Version: 2.13-37
Severity: wishlist
File: /usr/share/doc/libc6-dev/FAQ.gz
Dear Maintainer,
In the answer to question 1.1, What systems does the GNU C Library run
on?, the [e]glibc FAQ lists GNU Hurd, a bunch different architectures
supported with Linux 2.x, and ARM on
Package: libc6
Version: 2.13-37
Severity: wishlist
Dear Maintainer,
GDB 7.5 could use
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 7.0
APT prefers testing-proposed-updates
APT policy: (991, 'testing-proposed-updates'), (990, 'testing'), (500,
'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i386
Package: libc6
Version: 2.17-4
Severity: normal
Control: forwarded -1 http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13097
Control: affects -1 + gdb
Control: found -1 libc6/2.16-0experimental0
Dear Maintainer,
I recently noticed the behaviour in gdb complained of in the below
upstream bug report
Er, the previous message was supposed to say sometihng about how GDB
could benefit from SystemTap SDT probes in glibc. The GDB wiki talks a
bit about it on https://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/DistroAdvice.
Now that systemtap-sdt-dev is Architecture: all, it should be as simple
as this:
1. Add
Matthias Klose d...@debian.org writes:
[...]
If you really are too lazy to have architecture specific build
dependencies, then consider shipping an empty package for the
unsupported architectures.
Um, that was actually meant as a convenience for *you* (and anyone else
who works on a package
10 matches
Mail list logo
