Your message dated Sun, 16 Oct 2005 09:17:30 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#320008: fixed in sdlgfx 2.0.9-5
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 26 Jul 2005 11:11:55 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jul 26 04:11:55 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from d085066.adsl.hansenet.de (localhost.localdomain) [80.171.85.66] 
        by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
        id 1DxNLn-0004RR-00; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 04:11:55 -0700
Received: from aj by localhost.localdomain with local (Exim 4.52)
        id 1DxNLi-0005fP-52; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 13:11:50 +0200
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: Andreas Jochens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: sdlgfx: FTBFS (ppc64): cannot stat 
`debian/libsdl-gfx1.2/usr/lib/*.so': No such file or directory
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 13:11:50 +0200
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
        (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE 
        autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02

Package: sdlgfx
Version: 2.0.9-4
Severity: normal
Tags: patch

When building 'sdlgfx' on ppc64/unstable,
I get the following error:

 /usr/bin/install -c -m 644 SDL_imageFilter.h 
/sdlgfx-2.0.9/debian/libsdl-gfx1.2//usr/include/SDL/SDL_imageFilter.h
make[2]: Leaving directory `/sdlgfx-2.0.9'
make[1]: Leaving directory `/sdlgfx-2.0.9'
ln -s libsdl-gfx1.2 \
        debian/libsdl-gfx1.2-dev/usr/share/doc/libsdl-gfx1.2-dev
mv debian/libsdl-gfx1.2/usr/lib/*.so debian/libsdl-gfx1.2-dev/usr/lib/
mv: cannot stat `debian/libsdl-gfx1.2/usr/lib/*.so': No such file or directory
make: *** [install] Error 1

With the attached patch 'sdlgfx' can be compiled on ppc64.

Regards
Andreas Jochens

diff -urN ../tmp-orig/sdlgfx-2.0.9/ltconfig ./ltconfig
--- ../tmp-orig/sdlgfx-2.0.9/ltconfig   2003-07-29 12:40:24.000000000 +0000
+++ ./ltconfig  2005-07-26 10:22:40.000000000 +0000
@@ -2007,7 +2007,7 @@
   else
     # Only the GNU ld.so supports shared libraries on MkLinux.
     case "$host_cpu" in
-    powerpc*) dynamic_linker=no ;;
+    powerpc) dynamic_linker=no ;;
     *) dynamic_linker='Linux ld.so' ;;
     esac
   fi

---------------------------------------
Received: (at 320008-close) by bugs.debian.org; 16 Oct 2005 16:24:46 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Oct 16 09:24:46 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from katie by spohr.debian.org with local (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
        id 1ERBCU-00050z-00; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 09:17:30 -0700
From: Sam Hocevar (Debian packages) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.56 $
Subject: Bug#320008: fixed in sdlgfx 2.0.9-5
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 09:17:30 -0700
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
        (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER 
        autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 2

Source: sdlgfx
Source-Version: 2.0.9-5

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
sdlgfx, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

libsdl-gfx1.2-dev_2.0.9-5_i386.deb
  to pool/main/s/sdlgfx/libsdl-gfx1.2-dev_2.0.9-5_i386.deb
libsdl-gfx1.2_2.0.9-5_i386.deb
  to pool/main/s/sdlgfx/libsdl-gfx1.2_2.0.9-5_i386.deb
sdlgfx_2.0.9-5.diff.gz
  to pool/main/s/sdlgfx/sdlgfx_2.0.9-5.diff.gz
sdlgfx_2.0.9-5.dsc
  to pool/main/s/sdlgfx/sdlgfx_2.0.9-5.dsc



A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to [EMAIL PROTECTED],
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Sam Hocevar (Debian packages) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (supplier of updated sdlgfx 
package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED])


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 17:47:35 +0200
Source: sdlgfx
Binary: libsdl-gfx1.2 libsdl-gfx1.2-dev
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.0.9-5
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Sam Hocevar (Debian packages) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Changed-By: Sam Hocevar (Debian packages) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Description: 
 libsdl-gfx1.2 - drawing and graphical effects extension for SDL
 libsdl-gfx1.2-dev - development files for SDL_gfx
Closes: 319954 320008
Changes: 
 sdlgfx (2.0.9-5) unstable; urgency=low
 .
   * Removed acinclude.m4 and reboostrapped (Closes: #319954, #320008).
   * debian/rules:
     + Moved .la file to the -dev package.
Files: 
 18204efa41b501721a5875b4c964cd6f 627 libs optional sdlgfx_2.0.9-5.dsc
 a61848e98da8933dc46526a92a0c29ca 321504 libs optional sdlgfx_2.0.9-5.diff.gz
 31a95f79d752c079a018921aefff945b 36718 libs optional 
libsdl-gfx1.2_2.0.9-5_i386.deb
 0673a86a3e23f1691b9832254816a929 374780 libdevel optional 
libsdl-gfx1.2-dev_2.0.9-5_i386.deb

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDUniYfPP1rylJn2ERAvEAAKCgeaY44GgP0FEtjUi2Nupo0t//aACgny3u
iqYy+TMxENdhPeb6VerJ7tI=
=3j+h
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to