On Sat, 2014-07-26 at 21:05 +0100, Robert de Bath wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Jul 2014, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 2014-07-26 at 10:52 +0100, Robert de Bath wrote:
> >> On Fri, 25 Jul 2014, Robert de Bath wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Fri, 25 Jul 2014, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> >>>
> > What do you mean, reins
On Sat, 26 Jul 2014, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Sat, 2014-07-26 at 10:52 +0100, Robert de Bath wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2014, Robert de Bath wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2014, Ben Hutchings wrote:
What do you mean, reinstate? This is the same behaviour you get at
present. Well, here's a new version th
On Sat, 2014-07-26 at 10:52 +0100, Robert de Bath wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jul 2014, Robert de Bath wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 25 Jul 2014, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> >
> >> I had an idea how to unblock this, and finally got round to trying it,
> >> and it seems to work. That is, we build in x32 support but req
On Fri, 25 Jul 2014, Robert de Bath wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2014, Ben Hutchings wrote:
I had an idea how to unblock this, and finally got round to trying it,
and it seems to work. That is, we build in x32 support but require a
run-time parameter to enable. So, please try the attached patch
(ag
On Fri, 25 Jul 2014, Ben Hutchings wrote:
No, there should be no extra kernel flavours for i386 or amd64.
Hmm, still not getting this. I thought the point of flavours was to split
off options that, though popular, have undesirable side effects.
I had an idea how to unblock this, and finally g
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 patch
Bug #708070 [linux] enable x32 support for the amd64 kernels
Added tag(s) patch.
--
708070: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=708070
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to deb
Control: tag -1 patch
On Thu, 2014-07-24 at 21:47 +0100, Robert de Bath wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jul 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2014-07-24 at 20:22 +0100, Robert de Bath wrote:
> >> On Thu, 24 Jul 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
> >>
> > But that's rather different to now enabling x32 in the ar
On Thu, 24 Jul 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Thu, 2014-07-24 at 20:22 +0100, Robert de Bath wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jul 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
But that's rather different to now enabling x32 in the arch=amd64 kernel
which is what #708070 is about. Likewise creating a new
flavour=x86,arch=amd64 ke
On Thu, 2014-07-24 at 20:22 +0100, Robert de Bath wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jul 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2014-07-24 at 13:20 +0200, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> >> I was just hit by bug https://bugs.debian.org/736659 after installing
> >> gcc-multilib and later rebuilding my initra
On Thu, 24 Jul 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Thu, 2014-07-24 at 13:20 +0200, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
I was just hit by bug https://bugs.debian.org/736659 after installing
gcc-multilib and later rebuilding my initramfs.
I don't think this situation of having several x32 packages on the
On Thu, 2014-07-24 at 13:20 +0200, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote:
> I was just hit by bug https://bugs.debian.org/736659 after installing
> gcc-multilib and later rebuilding my initramfs.
>
> I don't think this situation of having several x32 packages on the
> archive (which other packages depe
I was just hit by bug https://bugs.debian.org/736659 after installing
gcc-multilib and later rebuilding my initramfs.
I don't think this situation of having several x32 packages on the
archive (which other packages depend on) while the official debian
kernel don't supports x32 at all is sustainabl
Package: linux
Severity: wishlist
Please enable support for the x32 syscalls, so that it becomes possible to run a
x32 chroot on such a kernel.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archiv
13 matches
Mail list logo
