Processed (with 1 errors): Bug#479952: Bug#468793: tokyocabinet - FTBFS: pthread_mutex_lock.c:71: __pthread_mutex_lock: Assertion `mutex-__data.__owner == 0' failed.

2008-11-03 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: reassign 468793 glibc Bug#468793: tokyocabinet - FTBFS: pthread_mutex_lock.c:71: __pthread_mutex_lock: Assertion `mutex-__data.__owner == 0' failed. Bug reassigned from package `tokyocabinet' to `glibc'. forcemerge 479952 468793 Bug#479952: libc6

Processed (with 1 errors): Bug#479952: Bug#468793: tokyocabinet - FTBFS: pthread_mutex_lock.c:71: __pthread_mutex_lock: Assertion `mutex-__data.__owner == 0' failed.

2008-11-03 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: reassign 468793 libc6/s390 Bug#468793: tokyocabinet - FTBFS: pthread_mutex_lock.c:71: __pthread_mutex_lock: Assertion `mutex-__data.__owner == 0' failed. Warning: Unknown package 'libc6/s390' Bug reassigned from package `glibc' to `libc6/s390

Bug#479952: Bug#468793: tokyocabinet - FTBFS: pthread_mutex_lock.c:71: __pthread_mutex_lock: Assertion `mutex-__data.__owner == 0' failed.

2008-11-03 Thread Martin Schwidefsky
On Thu, 2008-10-30 at 14:12 +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote: On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 12:44:35PM +, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 19:59 +0100, Julien Danjou wrote: At 1225129482 time_t, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: Maybe we could forward this bug to Martin Schwidefsky

Bug#479952: Bug#468793: tokyocabinet - FTBFS: pthread_mutex_lock.c:71: __pthread_mutex_lock: Assertion `mutex-__data.__owner == 0' failed.

2008-11-03 Thread Pierre Habouzit
reassign 468793 glibc forcemerge 479952 468793 thanks On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 09:59:28AM +, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: On Thu, 2008-10-30 at 14:12 +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote: On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 12:44:35PM +, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 19:59 +0100, Julien

Bug#468793: Bug#479952: Bug#468793: tokyocabinet - FTBFS: pthread_mutex_lock.c:71: __pthread_mutex_lock: Assertion `mutex-__data.__owner == 0' failed.

2008-11-03 Thread Aurelien Jarno
On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 10:59:28AM +0100, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: On Thu, 2008-10-30 at 14:12 +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote: On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 12:44:35PM +, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 19:59 +0100, Julien Danjou wrote: At 1225129482 time_t, Moritz

Bug#468793: tokyocabinet - FTBFS: pthread_mutex_lock.c:71: __pthread_mutex_lock: Assertion `mutex-__data.__owner == 0' failed.

2008-11-03 Thread Clint Adams
On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 04:48:26PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote: Not that I'm aware of, and it's probably a bug in s390 assembly, and actually not a tokyocabinet bug _at all_. So unless upstream knows s390 assembly... I don't think he can help a lot :) For future reference, the hercules

Bug#479952: Bug#468793: tokyocabinet - FTBFS: pthread_mutex_lock.c:71: __pthread_mutex_lock: Assertion `mutex-__data.__owner == 0' failed.

2008-10-30 Thread Martin Schwidefsky
On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 19:59 +0100, Julien Danjou wrote: At 1225129482 time_t, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: Maybe we could forward this bug to Martin Schwidefsky [EMAIL PROTECTED], who is the glibc s390 maintainer and who works for IBM on the s390 Linux port. Why not. Martin, do you have

Bug#479952: Bug#468793: tokyocabinet - FTBFS: pthread_mutex_lock.c:71: __pthread_mutex_lock: Assertion `mutex-__data.__owner == 0' failed.

2008-10-30 Thread Pierre Habouzit
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 12:44:35PM +, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 19:59 +0100, Julien Danjou wrote: At 1225129482 time_t, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: Maybe we could forward this bug to Martin Schwidefsky [EMAIL PROTECTED], who is the glibc s390 maintainer and who

Bug#479952: Bug#468793: tokyocabinet - FTBFS: pthread_mutex_lock.c:71: __pthread_mutex_lock: Assertion `mutex-__data.__owner == 0' failed.

2008-10-27 Thread Julien Danjou
At 1225129482 time_t, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: Maybe we could forward this bug to Martin Schwidefsky [EMAIL PROTECTED], who is the glibc s390 maintainer and who works for IBM on the s390 Linux port. Why not. Martin, do you have any clue about bug #479952? http://bugs.debian.org/479952