-29 Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* config/arm/arm.c (local_symbol_p): New function.
(legitimize_pic_address, arm_assemble_integer): Use it to prevent
GOTOFF relocations to the .text segment in execute-in-place code.
Index: config/arm/arm.c
On 6/27/06, David McCullough [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
AFAIK, you need to drop the -FPIC in favour of -fpic everywhere.
From the GCC manual, -fpic vs. -fPIC `makes a difference on the m68k,
PowerPC and SPARC.' For my purposes, it makes no difference on the
ARM.
You could try some
On 6/28/06, Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have experimented with GCC 4.0.3, 4.1.0, and 4.1.1. I found that
4.1.x behave the same; however, GCC 4.0.3 does not emit GOTOFF32
relocations. Apparently these are a new feature and preferable in some
instances since they do reduce the number
Hello Richard, Dan,
I'm trying to track down which part of the GCC source tree makes the
decision to emit either a R_ARM_GOT32 or a R_ARM_GOTOFF32 relocation.
A new feature in GCC 4.1 emits a R_ARM_GOTOFF32 relocation for a
reference to a static function. I thought there was a good chance one
of
On 6/28/06, Daniel Jacobowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
GOTOFF support has been there for a long while. Only use of it for
static functions is recent. It should be easy to find. But this is
not at all the only problem. GCC's PIC model assumes a fixed
displacement between segments.
Even if a
On 6/28/06, Daniel Jacobowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 03:17:30PM -0600, Shaun Jackman wrote:
I'm not terribly familiar with the GCC source tree. I scanned
config/arm/arm.c and its SVN log for changes that might affect
GOTOFF32, but came up empty. Do you know where
Compiling crtstuff.c with arm-elf-gcc 4.0.3 for -mthumb -fPIC
-msingle-pic-base fails. I had no trouble compiling GCC 4.1.1.
Cheers,
Shaun
make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/sjackman/src/toolchain/gcc-4.0.3/_build/gcc'
make GCC_FOR_TARGET=/home/sjackman/src/toolchain/gcc-4.0.3/_build/gcc/xgcc
I'm attempting to build an XIP Hello, world! application for the ARM
processor. I'm compiling with -fPIC -msingle-pic-base with the default
-mpic-register=r10. The layout of the memory map is such that the
.text and .rodata are in flash memory, and the .got, .data and so
forth are loaded into
On 6/27/06, Erwin Authried [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
which compiler/binutil version did you use? Could you post the source
that you used?
One other thing (although that doesn't seem to have to do with your
problem): It is important that you use -fpic (not -fPIC) so that the
correct multilib
On 6/27/06, Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm attempting to build an XIP Hello, world! application for the ARM
processor. I'm compiling with -fPIC -msingle-pic-base with the default
-mpic-register=r10. The layout of the memory map is such that the
.text and .rodata are in flash memory
On 6/27/06, David McCullough [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you using the ld-elf2flt/elf2flt.ld combo ?
It lays things out in a known way and has a '-move-rodata' option which
will put the rodata in with the .text if it contains no relocation info
needed at runtime.
Something like this on the
On 6/26/06, Matthew A. Nicholson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Greetings,
I think net.venge.monotone.debian is just about ready to be merged.
Could the debian package maintainers take a look and share their
thoughts please.
The branch basically adds a monotone-server package which makes it
easier
On 6/27/06, Nathaniel Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jun 27, 2006 at 02:20:07PM -0600, Shaun Jackman wrote:
Is there an autogen.sh (or equivalent) script to deal with the
autotools magickery. I got as far as...
config.status: error: cannot find input file: po/Makefile.in.in
make
The default -mpic-register (on ARM/Thumb) is r10. In -mthumb mode, r10
is not available to the math instructions as a direct argument. On top
of that, preserving r10 complicates the function prologue. Does it
make more sense to use a directly accessible register, r7 for example,
as the default
On 6/26/06, Richard Earnshaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As of gcc-4.2 it isn't fixed, it's just like any other pseudo generated
by the compiler.
Glad to hear it!
Thanks,
Shaun
After I've modified the MULTILIB options in t-arm-elf, what's the
fastest way to test the new configuration without rebuilding the
entire toolchain? Right now the best method I have is `make clean-gcc
all-gcc', which is admittedly quite slow.
Please cc me in your reply. Thanks!
Shaun
On 26 Jun 2006 14:04:36 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The usual hacked up way is to MULTILIB_EXCEPTIONS to remove
-msingle-pic-base without -fPIC. Something like
MULTILIB_EXCEPTIONS = -msingle-pic-base
might do it.
I tried your suggestion, but it didn't seem to have the desired
On 26 Jun 2006 14:42:20 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, that wouldn't work. MULTILIB_EXCEPTIONS takes a shell glob
pattern. It is invoked for each option set which is going to be
generated. I would expect that one of the option sets would be simply
-msingle-pic-base. So
On 6/26/06, Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Reading through gcc/genmultilib, it looks as though
MULTILIB_EXCLUSIONS can take a '!' parameter, but MULTILIB_EXCEPTIONS
cannot.
The solutions was to use MULTILIB_EXCLUSIONS!
MULTILIB_EXCLUSIONS += !fPIC/msingle-pic-base
Yeeha!
Cheers
On 6/26/06, Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After I've modified the MULTILIB options in t-arm-elf, what's the
fastest way to test the new configuration without rebuilding the
entire toolchain? Right now the best method I have is `make clean-gcc
all-gcc', which is admittedly quite slow
Hello Robin,
Sorry, for my delay in replying. I was on vacation in Montréal.
Yes, org.gudy.azureus2.ui.swt.Tab seems to be causing a
`java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Argument cannot be null'. This
error might be the reason Azureus won't start with java-gcj-compat
1.0.56-2, but I'm not
On 6/25/06, Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just tested Azureus with cacao 0.96-1 and classpath 2:0.91-3, and it
works! Wonderful news. Thanks for pointing this out. I would guess
that it's not so much cacao that makes it work, but the fact that
cacao uses classpath, whereas java-gcj
On 6/25/06, Robin Putters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think I updated classpath from experimental, since I was having
problems with an eclipse project of mine.
OK. I'll test classpath from experimental as well.
Cannot find Java function at 0xb7c94f5e
java: codegen-common.c:547:
Hello Robin,
Sorry, for my delay in replying. I was on vacation in Montréal.
Yes, org.gudy.azureus2.ui.swt.Tab seems to be causing a
`java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Argument cannot be null'. This
error might be the reason Azureus won't start with java-gcj-compat
1.0.56-2, but I'm not
On 6/25/06, Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just tested Azureus with cacao 0.96-1 and classpath 2:0.91-3, and it
works! Wonderful news. Thanks for pointing this out. I would guess
that it's not so much cacao that makes it work, but the fact that
cacao uses classpath, whereas java-gcj
On 6/25/06, Robin Putters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think I updated classpath from experimental, since I was having
problems with an eclipse project of mine.
OK. I'll test classpath from experimental as well.
Cannot find Java function at 0xb7c94f5e
java: codegen-common.c:547:
) unstable; urgency=low
+
+ * New upstream release.
+ * New maintainer.
+ * New watch file.
+
+ -- Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon, 19 Jun 2006 09:26:53 -0600
+
monotone (0.27-0.1) unstable; urgency=low
* New upstream release.
--- monotone-0.27.orig/debian/docs
+++ monotone-0.27/debian/docs
On 6/21/06, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:49:58 -0600, Shaun Jackman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
sjackman --- monotone-0.27.orig/debian/docs
sjackman +++ monotone-0.27/debian/docs
sjackman @@ -10,4 +10,3 @@
sjackman
On 6/19/06, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Mon, 19 Jun 2006 23:04:41 +0200 (CEST), Richard
Levitte - VMS Whacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
richard Oh, for the love of (/#%¤(/%/)I( Forgot to add the files to
richard EXTRA_DIST in
I'm seeing the following error when attempting to compile monotone 0.27.
cmd_automate.cc:128: error: using-declaration for non-member at class
scope
I'm using GCC 4.0.3 (Debian 4:4.0.3-4) and boost 1.32.0 (Debian
1.32.0-6). I haven't looked into this too closely yet, but does anyone
On 6/19/06, Nathaniel Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 10:55:37AM -0600, Shaun Jackman wrote:
I'm seeing the following error when attempting to compile monotone 0.27.
cmd_automate.cc:128: error: using-declaration for non-member at
class scope
I'm using GCC
The examples directory is mentioned in the ChangeLog and in
debian/docs, but does not seem to be included in the 0.27 tarball
distribution.
Cheers,
Shaun
___
Monotone-devel mailing list
Monotone-devel@nongnu.org
package azureus
tag 374102 +unreproducible
thanks
Hello Tore,
I just tested for this bug myself, and my installation does not behave
in the manner you reported. I'm still running XFree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-1.
I've seen other bugs related to the version of XFree86/Xorg being
used. Perhaps this is
On 6/10/06, Arnaud Fontaine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
retitle 354626 ITA: glosstex -- Prepare glossaries and lists of acronyms
owner 354626 !
thanks
Hello,
I'm interested by taking care of this package. I'm using latex
regularly. I will upload a new version of the package ASAP.
On 6/10/06, Arnaud Fontaine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
retitle 354626 ITA: glosstex -- Prepare glossaries and lists of acronyms
owner 354626 !
thanks
Hello,
I'm interested by taking care of this package. I'm using latex
regularly. I will upload a new version of the package ASAP.
My broken wrist has healed -- yeah! -- so I'm back from that
`vacation', and now I'm on my way to Montréal for a week.
Cheers,
Shaun
I don't know how it happened, but apparently I accidentally added a
revision to a branch to which it does not belong. How do I remove the
revision from the branch? Is there a command to remove a specified
cert?
Thanks,
Shaun
___
Monotone-devel
On 6/8/06, Chad Walstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know how it happened, but apparently I accidentally added a
revision to a branch to which it does not belong. How do I remove
the revision from the branch? Is there a command to remove
On 6/8/06, Timothy Brownawell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2006-06-08 at 10:23 -0600, Shaun Jackman wrote:
I don't know how it happened, but apparently I accidentally added a
revision to a branch to which it does not belong. How do I remove the
revision from the branch
On 6/5/06, Andrew Pollock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The issue is that I uploaded -3; it was not a QA upload. My changes in
-3 seem to have been omitted from the QA upload of -4. See (far) below
for the changelog from my -3 upload.
Sure, I read the changelog before composing my previous
On 6/5/06, Andrew Pollock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The issue is that I uploaded -3; it was not a QA upload. My changes in
-3 seem to have been omitted from the QA upload of -4. See (far) below
for the changelog from my -3 upload.
Sure, I read the changelog before composing my previous
Is monotone-viz 0.14 meant to be able to pull the options and revision
from _MTN as it does for MT? It doesn't seem to work for me.
Cheers,
Shaun
___
Monotone-devel mailing list
Monotone-devel@nongnu.org
On 6/5/06, Olivier Andrieu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No but the latest revision on the venge.net repository, yes.
I should have released that ages ago, sorry.
Off-topic, but I won't release the next monotone-viz for Debian for a
couple weeks anyways. I'm going on vacation to Montréal for a
On 6/4/06, Martin Michlmayr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
found 361603 0.1.2.2-4
thanks
* Martin Michlmayr [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-04-09 21:11]:
* Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-04-09 13:07]:
It should be noted that this bug only affects 64-bit targets. This
patch is untested on 64-bit
http://www.cyrius.com/
-- Forwarded message --
From: Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2006 14:03:30 -0700
Subject: Bug#361603: fixed in simulavr 0.1.2.2-3
Source: simulavr
Source-Version: 0.1.2.2-3
We believe that the bug you reported
On 6/4/06, Martin Michlmayr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
found 361603 0.1.2.2-4
thanks
* Martin Michlmayr [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-04-09 21:11]:
* Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-04-09 13:07]:
It should be noted that this bug only affects 64-bit targets. This
patch is untested on 64-bit
http://www.cyrius.com/
-- Forwarded message --
From: Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2006 14:03:30 -0700
Subject: Bug#361603: fixed in simulavr 0.1.2.2-3
Source: simulavr
Source-Version: 0.1.2.2-3
We believe that the bug you reported
On 5/29/06, Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shaun Jackman writes:
You've clearly put a fair amount of work into Ubuntu's Azureus
package. Would you be interested in maintaining the Debian package as
well?
sorry, no. lack of time.
You can't blame me for trying. =) I'm likewise
On 6/1/06, Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ok, but still wondering how you will compile using a free runtime and
compiler.
I'm working on it.
When I run Azureus with java-gcj-compat, the splash screen comes up
but never displays the main GUI or the system tray applet. I thought
it
On 6/1/06, Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When I run Azureus with java-gcj-compat, the splash screen comes up
but never displays the main GUI or the system tray applet. I thought
it might be related to the following CTabItem exception, which I
thought might be related to the azureus
Architecture: source i386 all
Version: 3.1.2-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Description:
libswt-gnome-gtk-3.1-jni - Standard Widget Toolkit for GTK Gnome JNI library
libswt-gtk-3.1 - Standard Widget Toolkit
On 5/29/06, Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Package: azureus
Version: 2.4.0.2
azureus can be built using gij/gcj and be moved to main. Please
consider using the upstream build procedure and do not include
upstream jar files found in debian as well. A package including
patches can be
On 5/29/06, Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the bouncycastle provider.
Provided by the libbcprov-java package. I see. Thanks for pointing
this duplication out to me. It's the first I'd seen it.
You've clearly put a fair amount of work into Ubuntu's Azureus
package. Would you be
On 5/27/06, Michael Koch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As said here and in the BTS several times before: On Debian SWT only
works with Mozilla. We tried it with Firefox and other browsers and
failed badly. On Ubuntu it works woth Firefox somehow. Ubuntu has a
slightly different version of Firefox.
Package: toolchain-source
Version: 3.4-5
Severity: important
Building GCC for powerpc-linux fails because it's confusing
powerpc-linux with powerpc-linux-gnu.
Cheers,
Shaun
gcc-powerpc-linux-3.4.3$ fakeroot debian/rules binary
...
rm -rf debian/cpp-3.4-powerpc-linux
dh_installdirs
On 5/27/06, Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Building GCC for powerpc-linux fails because it's confusing
powerpc-linux with powerpc-linux-gnu.
This bug is caused by using dpkg-architecture from dpkg-dev 1.13.19.
Downgrading dpkg-dev to 1.10.28 works around this issue.
Cheers,
Shaun
Only just today I discovered that Ubuntu's version of Azureus is
compiled against Eclipse's SWT. It might be possible to install the
deb package of Azureus from Ubuntu on a Debian box.
Cheers,
Shaun
On 5/27/06, Sebastian Ley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I rebuilt azureus against the SWT which
On 5/26/06, Matt Philmon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks Shaun. On Ubuntu (Dapper), azureus requires the package
libswt3.1-gtk-java (listed as one of the Eclipse libraries), which
requires mozilla-browser. It appears that the same is true with Debian.
So, I guess it's really up to the packagers
On 5/26/06, Matt Philmon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks Shaun. On Ubuntu (Dapper), azureus requires the package
libswt3.1-gtk-java (listed as one of the Eclipse libraries), which
requires mozilla-browser. It appears that the same is true with Debian.
So, I guess it's really up to the packagers
tag 368619 +confirmed
thanks
On 5/23/06, Johannes Rohr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
As said above. Azureus fails to launch the web browser,
e.g. from the help menu items which link to web pages.
I have epiphany and firefox installed. The mozilla
alternative points to /usr/bin/firefox.
I
Package: eagle
Version: 4.16-2
On 5/3/06, Thorsten Schulz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Shaun,
I recently upgraded to Xorg7 (I have Debian/unstable installed), and with that
I also upgraded eagle to 4.16-2. But the user-interface comes up only with
square blocks instead of readable font. Is
On 5/15/06, Uwe Storbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you still seeing this bug with recent versions of FreeGuide? Does
Andy's suggestion help?
Sorry for the delay. Yes, Andy's suggestion seems to work, at least for
version 0.8.5 and 0.8.6.
Thanks,
Uwe
No worries. Glad to hear Andy's
I can type -- slowly -- but I won't be doing any package maintenance
for three to six weeks.
Cheers,
Shaun
This is not the bug you are looking for.
Cheers,
Shaun
On 5/10/06, Debian Bug Tracking System [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report
#354629: RM: sjforth -- RoM; unmaintained,
which was filed against the ftp.debian.org package.
It has been closed
What optimisation option is needed to prod arm-elf-gcc -mthumb to
generate a tail call? ARM works as expected.
Please cc me in your reply. Thanks!
Shaun
arm-elf-gcc (GCC) 4.1.0
$ cat EOF tail.c
int tail(void);
int main()
{
return tail();
}
EOF
$ arm-elf-gcc -mthumb -S -O2 tail.c
$ sed
clone 362699 -1
reassign -1 dpkg-dev
retitle -1 dpkg-source: Timestamps on documentation advance artificially
severity -1 normal
thanks
When dpkg-source applies the patch, the time stamp on each of the
patched files advances artificially. This makes it look as though the
documentation in
On 5/9/06, A. Costa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you're too busy to report it I'd do it, but probably not half
as well, since I haven't yet used 'dpkg-source' and don't quite know
what to look for. The symptoms seem plain enough though.
OK, done. You should see a report on dpkg-dev soon.
On 5/9/06, Lex Hider [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detailaid=1474796group_id=84122atid=575154
Thanks for making the connection to the upstream bug, Lex! It explains
a lot. This bug seems specific to running Xorg 7 -- I run Xorg 6.9
myself -- and I've
On 5/9/06, Lex Hider [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
which xorg bug is that?
http://bugs.debian.org/366557
Great! I look forward to your troubleshooting and response.
Cheers,
Shaun
On 5/8/06, Lex Hider [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I to am having this problem.
I get the warning popup in the bottom right corner, and hitting hide
or hide all does nothing.
Am running sid with azureus 2.4.0.2-1
sun package
Package: toolchain-source
Version: 3.4-5
/usr/share/doc/toolchain-source/HOWTO/README contains a dead link to
http://people.debian.org/~debacle/cross.html
Cheers,
Shaun
On 5/3/06, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
Wasn't it concluded that we (monotone ppl) would use the 0.25-0.x
standard, and that Debian maintainers would use 0.25-y, so there would
be a difference between us and Debian?
Right now, you're patch clashes with an already
Thanks for the added info, Lauri. I've been unable to reproduce this
bug. It has me mystified. I've tried using different window managers.
I'm not sure which software component is the root-cause of this bug.
If this bug ever `goes away' for you, I'd be really interested to hear
what you think
On 5/4/06, Lauri Alanko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
May I ask what exactly is preventing this bug from being fixed? As I
told two months ago, it seems that the problem is only that upstream's
64-bit sources aren't used by the package on amd64. When I applied the
changes between the 32-bit and
On 5/3/06, Edward J. Shornock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I also have the problem of not being able to close the warning window.
Thanks for the report. If, between the three of you bug reporters, you
could figure out what you have in common, I'd much appreciate it.
Cheers,
Shaun
On 5/4/06, Lauri Alanko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
May I ask what exactly is preventing this bug from being fixed? As I
told two months ago, it seems that the problem is only that upstream's
64-bit sources aren't used by the package on amd64. When I applied the
changes between the 32-bit and
On 4/29/06, John Bovey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I do have Lintian and Linda installed but I didn't look carefully enough at the
output. The new build is attached.
I've uploaded the new build to the Debian archive. Congratulations on
completing your first package!
Cheers,
Shaun
On 4/26/06, Huy Duong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Shaun,
Here's the info from the azureus About screen:
Java 1.5.0_04
Sun Microsystems Inc.
SWT v3139, gtk
Linux v2.6.14, i386
Same as me, for the most part.
I tried switching window manager to sawfish, but I got
the same problem, so it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 16:46:54 -0600
Source: monotone
Binary: monotone
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.25-0.1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Tomas Fasth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED
On 4/26/06, A. Costa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 14:10:23 -0600
Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The bug probably shouldn't be closed. I would tag it wontfix, and post
it on debian-devel for discussion.
I'm with you for reopening and reclassifying, but I don't mix
Package: ftp.debian.org
swt-gtk 3.0-6 (in sarge) does not work on ia64. It dies with a
SIGSEGV. Please remove the binary packages.
libswt-gtk3_3.0-6_ia64.deb
libswt-gtk3-jni_3.0-6_ia64.deb
libswt-mozilla3-jni_3.0-6_ia64.deb
Thanks,
Shaun
On 4/26/06, Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4
On 4/26/06, Ian Wienand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 10:13:05AM -0600, Shaun Jackman wrote:
Try...
$ java -Djava.library.path=/usr/lib/jni:/usr/lib \
-classpath .:/usr/share/java/swt-gtk-3.jar:/usr/share/java/swt-pi-gtk-3.jar
Hello
Ok, we have lift-off. Well
On 4/26/06, Ian Wienand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 10:13:05AM -0600, Shaun Jackman wrote:
Try...
$ java -Djava.library.path=/usr/lib/jni:/usr/lib \
-classpath .:/usr/share/java/swt-gtk-3.jar:/usr/share/java/swt-pi-gtk-3.jar
Hello
Ok, we have lift-off. Well
Package: ftp.debian.org
swt-gtk 3.0-6 (in sarge) does not work on ia64. It dies with a
SIGSEGV. Please remove the binary packages.
libswt-gtk3_3.0-6_ia64.deb
libswt-gtk3-jni_3.0-6_ia64.deb
libswt-mozilla3-jni_3.0-6_ia64.deb
Thanks,
Shaun
On 4/26/06, Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4
Package: ftp.debian.org
swt-gtk 3.0-6 (in sarge) does not work on ia64. It dies with a
SIGSEGV. Please remove the binary packages.
libswt-gtk3_3.0-6_ia64.deb
libswt-gtk3-jni_3.0-6_ia64.deb
libswt-mozilla3-jni_3.0-6_ia64.deb
Thanks,
Shaun
On 4/26/06, Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4
On 4/26/06, Ian Wienand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 10:13:05AM -0600, Shaun Jackman wrote:
Try...
$ java -Djava.library.path=/usr/lib/jni:/usr/lib \
-classpath .:/usr/share/java/swt-gtk-3.jar:/usr/share/java/swt-pi-gtk-3.jar
Hello
Ok, we have lift-off. Well
Did this happen just once or every time you start Azureus?
Cheers,
Shaun
On 4/25/06, Huy Duong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Package: azureus
Version: 2.4.0.2-1
Severity: normal
I was using Azureus when it suddenly shutdown due to a
NullPointerException (already reported to Azureus
dev).
Hello Huy,
I tested azureus 2.4.0.2-1 with libswt-gtk-3.1-java 3.1.2-2 and
sun-j2sdk1.5 1.5.0+update04, which is your exact setup, and was unable
to reproduce the bug. I ran...
$ azureus
$ kill -KILL %%
$ azureus
... to shut down azureus uncleanly and restart azureus. I saw the
Warning dialog,
Package: gcj-4.0
Version: 4:4.0.3-3
Severity: important
Justification: violates a *should* directive of the Debian Policy for Java
The default java.library.path of applications compiled using gcj does
not include /usr/lib/jni. The Debian Policy for Java [1] states that
/usr/lib/jni *should* be
On 4/25/06, Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Package: gcj-4.0
Version: 4:4.0.3-3
Severity: important
Justification: violates a *should* directive of the Debian Policy for Java
...
[1] http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/java-policy/x105.html
It seems that a package `should' put
package azureus
tag 364706 unreproducible
thanks
Hello Huy,
On 4/25/06, Huy Duong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's the output you requested:
...
These look fine.
As for metacity, I'm using 2.14.1-1
I just tested 2.14.1-1, I don't see the bug there either.
When my mouse hovers over the
On 4/25/06, Ian Wienand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The azureus package is `Arch: all' and shouldn't require rebuilding.
Could you install libswt-gtk3-jni 3.0-6 (Arch: any) and azureus
2.2.0.2-1 (Arch: all), and test azureus?
(sorry, I've been away)
If we're talking about the same thing
On 4/25/06, Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Package: gcj-4.0
Version: 4:4.0.3-3
Severity: important
Justification: violates a *should* directive of the Debian Policy for Java
...
[1] http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/java-policy/x105.html
It seems that a package `should' put
Excellent progress, John! Send me a .diff.gz, .dsc, .deb, and
.changes, just as soon as you have them. After looking 'em over, I'll
sponsor the upload changing maintainership of the package and advocate
for you.
Cheers,
Shaun
On 4/24/06, John Bovey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shaun,
I have
Excellent progress, John! Send me a .diff.gz, .dsc, .deb, and
.changes, just as soon as you have them. After looking 'em over, I'll
sponsor the upload changing maintainership of the package and advocate
for you.
Cheers,
Shaun
On 4/24/06, John Bovey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shaun,
I have
On 4/22/06, A. Costa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
I'm going to reassign this bug as a wishlist item to the debhelper
package.
Thanks for making the call, but just as the little bug was a symptom
of a bigger systemic bug, now the bigger bug closing is perhaps a
symptom of the biggest bug
Package: kernel-image-2.4.27-3-k7
Version: 2.4.27-10sarge2
Severity: normal
Unpacking kernel-image-2.4.27-3-k7 (from
.../kernel-image-2.4.27-3-k7_2.4.27-10sarge2_i386.deb) ...
Selecting previously deselected package kernel-image-2.4-k7.
Unpacking kernel-image-2.4-k7 (from
On 7/25/05, Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/25/05, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nonsense. All you need to require is that each *private* key has a
unique keyid. And honestly, who would want to have two private keys
with the same keyid in the same
On 4/18/06, Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After fixing these minor issues, the NMU package would be suitable for
uploading. Would anyone like to first test it out?
I've posted my monotone 0.25-0.1 packages:
http://people.debian.org/~sjackman/debian/pool/main/m/monotone/
I've
On 4/20/06, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Thu, 20 Apr 2006 09:55:54 -0600, Shaun
Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
sjackman One thing I didn't expect, but I understand now, is that
sjackman `mtn log' and monotone-viz still show [EMAIL
801 - 900 of 1716 matches
Mail list logo
