On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 08:46:08AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Sven Luther:
As said, i see this on both an x86 box and my powerbook, but the complete
code
is more involved, having a pselect, as well as a SIGALRM handler, which both
trigger the localtime_r, as well as a postgresql
On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 01:35:22PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Sven Luther:
On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 08:46:08AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Sven Luther:
As said, i see this on both an x86 box and my powerbook, but the
complete code
is more involved, having a pselect
to this was of the kind of :
struct tm tm;
time_t t;
t = time(NULL);
localtime (t, tm);
This is in a fr_FR.utf8 locale, on a powerpc box. The same code on an x86 box
just segfaults without error message.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 4.0
APT prefers testing
On Wed, Apr 04, 2007 at 07:50:02PM +0100, Stephen Gran wrote:
This one time, at band camp, Sven Luther said:
The code yielding to this was of the kind of :
struct tm tm;
time_t t;
t = time(NULL);
localtime (t, tm);
This is in a fr_FR.utf8 locale, on a powerpc box
On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 12:00:01AM +0100, Stephen Gran wrote:
This one time, at band camp, Sven Luther said:
And indeed, like i said, it worked fine 100s of times, and then died. Try :
int main (void) {
struct tm tm;
time_t t;
while (1) {
t = time(NULL);
localtime_r
on some arches ? Maybe we could
enable it on arches where it is stable and has some benefit, and leave it off
for now on those arches where it is known to cause problems.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 11:34:14AM +0100, Stefano Melchior wrote:
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 05:31:34PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Hi all,
/usr/lib/gcc/powerpc-linux-gnu/4.0.3/../../../../lib/crt1.o:(.rodata+0x0):
undefined reference to `_SDA_BASE_'
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
had to add some section to
the arch/ppc/ld.script file or something.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
downgrading to the older binutils version, and
seeing what went wrong ?
As said on irc, the likely solution here would be to disable the alpha native
compilers until the solution is found.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble
?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 07:16:02PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 07:09:51PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
timeframe to get a ppc64 biarch toolchain in sid or even experimental ? Or
should i rely on the ubuntu toolchain, and use that to upload kernels to sid
in the near
still alive? If so, I guess
asm-m68k/setup.h is necessary for asm-ppc/setup.h.
Yes, AFAIK APUS is still alive.
Indeed, and thanks to Roman, we should even ressurect debian support for it
for sarge :)
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
On Sat, Apr 03, 2004 at 04:09:41PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
On Sat, Apr 03, 2004 at 09:02:32AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
Sven Luther writes:
That said, i have close to zero deep understanding on how glibc and gcc
interact on this issue, and what is going on about libgcc. I am told
On Sat, Apr 03, 2004 at 09:02:32AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
Sven Luther writes:
That said, i have close to zero deep understanding on how glibc and gcc
interact on this issue, and what is going on about libgcc. I am told by
the #ppc64 folk that i should compile gcc with the ppc64 target
On Sat, Apr 03, 2004 at 09:02:32AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
Sven Luther writes:
That said, i have close to zero deep understanding on how glibc and gcc
interact on this issue, and what is going on about libgcc. I am told by
the #ppc64 folk that i should compile gcc with the ppc64 target
told by
the #ppc64 folk that i should compile gcc with the ppc64 target, but
have it default to 32bit code by default. My early tries for this try to
generate a lib64gcc1, and fails, as you said. Do you have any wisdom to
share with me about why this is the case ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
and not unsigned int, or something such.
I have strong suspicions that this is really a linux-kernel-header bug,
and am also CCing debian-glibc mailing list on this subject, just in
case they would know something we ignore.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 12:58:28PM -0700, LaMont Jones wrote:
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 05:37:56PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 11:23:04AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
Ok. LaMont, can you requeue parted, and close this bug once it did work
out fine ?
requeued.
Cool
and not unsigned int, or something such.
I have strong suspicions that this is really a linux-kernel-header bug,
and am also CCing debian-glibc mailing list on this subject, just in
case they would know something we ignore.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
? there was
another report for powerpc, but it was hand built ok.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 12:58:28PM -0700, LaMont Jones wrote:
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 05:37:56PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 11:23:04AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
Ok. LaMont, can you requeue parted, and close this bug once it did work
out fine ?
requeued.
Cool
On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 01:01:38AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Sun, Dec 07, 2003 at 12:11:03PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 09:19:15AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 05:33:36AM -0600, Debian Bug Tracking System
wrote:
Processing
On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 01:01:38AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Sun, Dec 07, 2003 at 12:11:03PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 09:19:15AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 05:33:36AM -0600, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
Processing
.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
, or if
there is a problem with it, temm it, so i can go and investigate more,
and maybe find a better solution.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
followup on this.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
followup on this.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
reassign 218980 parted
thanks
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 01:01:09AM +, Philip Blundell wrote:
On Sun, 2003-11-09 at 19:46, Sven Luther wrote:
Well, it should not at least. I will investigate and see if the
linux/fs.h is where it comes from or not. I was not able to find where
the size_t
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 01:01:09AM +, Philip Blundell wrote:
On Sun, 2003-11-09 at 19:46, Sven Luther wrote:
Well, it should not at least. I will investigate and see if the
linux/fs.h is where it comes from or not. I was not able to find where
the size_t was defined though
reassign 218980 parted
thanks
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 01:01:09AM +, Philip Blundell wrote:
On Sun, 2003-11-09 at 19:46, Sven Luther wrote:
Well, it should not at least. I will investigate and see if the
linux/fs.h is where it comes from or not. I was not able to find where
the size_t
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 01:01:09AM +, Philip Blundell wrote:
On Sun, 2003-11-09 at 19:46, Sven Luther wrote:
Well, it should not at least. I will investigate and see if the
linux/fs.h is where it comes from or not. I was not able to find where
the size_t was defined though
a priority higher than it has now, not sure though.
Anyway, is there anyway i can help on this, so that it gets solved ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 12:02:05PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 02:23:46PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
I am a bit at a loss on how to solve this problem though. I guess it is
trying to do a sizeof(size_t[1]) which is the cause of the first
problem
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 10:54:11AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 02:00:55PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 12:02:05PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 02:23:46PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
I am a bit at a loss on how
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 12:37:08PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 05:15:03PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 10:54:11AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 02:00:55PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 12:02
a priority higher than it has now, not sure though.
Anyway, is there anyway i can help on this, so that it gets solved ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 12:02:05PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 02:23:46PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
I am a bit at a loss on how to solve this problem though. I guess it is
trying to do a sizeof(size_t[1]) which is the cause of the first
problem
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 10:54:11AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 02:00:55PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 12:02:05PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 02:23:46PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
I am a bit at a loss on how
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 12:37:08PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 05:15:03PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 10:54:11AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 02:00:55PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Sun, Nov 09, 2003 at 12:02
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 02:23:46PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 08:00:37PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 06:39:19PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Subject: parted: FTBFS : probably due to new glibc and 2.6.0-test linux kernel
headers.
Package
Subject: parted: FTBFS : probably due to new glibc and 2.6.0-test linux kernel headers.
Package: parted
Version: 1.6.6-1.1
Severity: important
Justification: fails to build from source
i386-linux-gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../libparted -I.. -I../../include -g -O2
-D_REENTRANT
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 06:39:19PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Subject: parted: FTBFS : probably due to new glibc and 2.6.0-test linux kernel
headers.
Package: parted
Version: 1.6.6-1.1
Severity: important
Justification: fails to build from source
i386-linux-gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I
Hello, ...
Could you perhaps add a :
Conflict: ocaml (3.06-7)
This is not a problem with unstable, since i rebuilt the ocaml packages,
but the version in testing was built with the older glibc, and will
break with the newer glibc, if the new glibc enters testing before the
ocaml packages do.
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 12:59:17AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
At Tue, 18 Feb 2003 15:43:37 +0100,
Sven Luther wrote:
On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 10:47:50PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
At Tue, 18 Feb 2003 12:03:01 +0100,
Sven Luther wrote:
Could you perhaps add a :
Conflict
,
Sven Luther
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 11:18:27AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 11:19:04AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Hello, ...
I have a package who used to use /usr/include/db1/ndbm.h to build ndbm
support, which worked fine with libc6 versions prior to 2.3.1.
Now, this file
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 11:45:56AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 05:27:01PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 11:18:27AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 11:19:04AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Hello, ...
I have a package who
,
Sven Luther
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 11:18:27AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 11:19:04AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Hello, ...
I have a package who used to use /usr/include/db1/ndbm.h to build ndbm
support, which worked fine with libc6 versions prior to 2.3.1.
Now, this file
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 11:45:56AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 05:27:01PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 11:18:27AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 11:19:04AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
Hello, ...
I have a package who
53 matches
Mail list logo
