Rust architecture status

Please answer to pkg-rust-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org. Don't answer to debian-ports@l.d.o (just let your mail client honor the Reply-To field). Hello! I would like to a quick heads-up regarding the architecture status of Rust after having had at the possibilities to get it bootstr

Intel Purley Platform Server support status or roadmap

do some search work and see some webpage, but there is no clear support status or support roadmap. I don't know if it's proper to ask this question here; if not, please let me know where could I get help. Many thanks! Regards, Ocean He 何海洋 Linux Engineer, OS & Preload SW and FW De

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

rently have 6 machines up > with remote power and remote console (of course that being development > boards is not so nice as server remote management goodies). Some > machines require a button press but local admins are great and always > happy to help. > > If none steps up explain

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 04:35:03PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > (sorry for jumping in late here) > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 07:51:55AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > > On Wed, 2016-06-15 at 01:37 +0300, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: > > > > > At the openmainframeproject EU meetup, it was indicated th

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

(sorry for jumping in late here) On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 07:51:55AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > On Wed, 2016-06-15 at 01:37 +0300, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: > > > At the openmainframeproject EU meetup, it was indicated that SUSE > > joined with indication that Open Build Service might be able to u

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 10:35:20PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Yeah, apparently it's cheaper to bootstrap a complete new little endian > platform than to fix portability issues in existing software... I believe a big reason is that Nvidia cards expect little endian data, and the overhead of

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 8:32 PM, Nelson H. F. Beebe wrote: > Recent traffic on this list has discussed Debian on PowerPC and > big-endian vs little-endian. > > The next-generation US national laboratory facilities are to be based > on PowerPC, and one source that I read mentioned little-endian, li

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

Recent traffic on this list has discussed Debian on PowerPC and big-endian vs little-endian. The next-generation US national laboratory facilities are to be based on PowerPC, and one source that I read mentioned little-endian, likely for binary file compatibility with files produced on Intel x86 a

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On 2016-06-20 10:29, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: On 06/20/2016 04:15 PM, Lennart Sorensen wrote: On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 04:11:32PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: Well, we just did a full archive rebuild of "ppc64" to be able to support ppc64 on the e5500 cores by disabling AltiVe

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On 06/20/2016 04:15 PM, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 04:11:32PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: >> Well, we just did a full archive rebuild of "ppc64" to be able to >> support ppc64 on the e5500 cores by disabling AltiVec, didn't we? > > Well it is getting there. The

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 04:11:32PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > Well, we just did a full archive rebuild of "ppc64" to be able to > support ppc64 on the e5500 cores by disabling AltiVec, didn't we? Well it is getting there. -- Len Sorensen

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On 06/20/2016 04:05 PM, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > Also I suspect many users of 64 bit capable freescale chips > (e5500 and e6500 cores) are running 32 bit powerpc since they > don't have enough ram to actually really gain anything > from going to 64 bit, and the ppc64 port isn't done yet. Well, we

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 08:35:02PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > Do they implement the ISA required by the existing Debian port? Yes. The only ones that don't are the Freescale 85xx and P10[12]x chips, which are powerpcspe due to using the e500 core. All the 83xx and 82xx chips which are still

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

* Lennart Sorensen: > There are a lot of 32bit powerpc chips still going into embedded systems > being built today. They are not going away anytime soon. Do they implement the ISA required by the existing Debian port?

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

> In other words, i don't think a s390x box will ever just die. I'm sure “death” encompasses all events which might lead Debian to lose access to relevant hardware. It's not just about faults with a piece of equipment.

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On 19 June 2016 at 02:25, William ML Leslie wrote: > > In case it isn't clear, the number of users of the architecture is not part > of the qualification, it is the amount of maintenance pressure involved. > Package maintainers have to put more effort into ensuring builds succeed for > release

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On 06/18/2016 06:25 PM, William ML Leslie wrote: > In case it isn't clear, the number of users of the architecture is not part > of the qualification, it is the amount of maintenance pressure involved. > Package > maintainers have to put more effort into ensuring builds succeed for release > arc

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

In case it isn't clear, the number of users of the architecture is not part of the qualification, it is the amount of maintenance pressure involved. Package maintainers have to put more effort into ensuring builds succeed for release architectures, which detracts from other work that needs to be do

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

I run all sorts of PowerPC machines with various versions of Debian and I don't see that coming to end anytime soon. These are excellent and reliable machines. Biggest issues/hurdles are just graphics at the moment for both ATI/AMD and Nvidia cards, but even if that is never resolved/fixed or per

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

Hi, Dan DeVoto wrote: In addition to the debian powerpc mailing list, powerpc users are active on the Ubuntu forums. I'm running Debian Sid on a Powerbook and everything works except 3D acceleration. I don't see a need to drop it. I hope that my iBook G3 will serve me for years to come! Lo

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 09:04:12AM +0200, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > The debian-powerpc@l.d.o mailing list is active so I would say it > still has some users. I have been using partch.d.o for doing some work > on PowerPC. I posted a summary of work people have been doing on this > port lately: > >

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On 2016-06-15 00:37, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: There is openmainframe project https://www.openmainframeproject.org/ , which I believe offers access to z/VM instances hosted by Marist colledge. At the openmainframeproject EU meetup, it was indicated that SUSE joined with indication that Open Bui

RE: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

Here too all new amiga Ng are PPC with last generations of gpu pcie Amd boards and we are using linux expecially Debian. Luigi From: herminio.hernande...@gmail.com Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 22:02:29 -0700 Subject: Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification To: hector.o...@gmail.com CC

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

Hi Hector, On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 2:12 AM, Hector Oron wrote: [...] > While working out ArchitectureQualification/Stretch wiki page I > believe everything is mostly fine for release, however I got a > personal concern on powerpc architecture. Is it well maintained? Does > it have porters? Does i

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

re hardware, we currently have 6 machines up > with remote power and remote console (of course that being development > boards is not so nice as server remote management goodies). Some > machines require a button press but local admins are great and always > happy to help. > > If none

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

and remote console (of course that being development boards is not so nice as server remote management goodies). Some machines require a button press but local admins are great and always happy to help. If none steps up explaining what are DSA concerns on the ARM architectures, please update status

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On Tue, Jun 14, 2016, at 18:37, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: > > There is openmainframe project https://www.openmainframeproject.org/ , > which I believe offers access to z/VM instances hosted by Marist > colledge. > > At the openmainframeproject EU meetup, it was indicated that SUSE > joined with

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On Wed, 2016-06-15 at 01:37 +0300, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: > At the openmainframeproject EU meetup, it was indicated that SUSE > joined with indication that Open Build Service might be able to use > resources hosted by Marist. > > I wonder if it makes sense to reach out, and see if there are >

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On 14 June 2016 at 20:22, wrote: > On 2016-06-14 03:06, Philipp Kern wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 07:33:56PM +, Niels Thykier wrote: >>> >>> Philipp Kern: >>> > On 2016-06-05 12:01, Niels Thykier wrote: >>> >> * amd64, i386, armel, armhf, arm64, mips, mipsel, powerpc, ppc64el, >>> >>

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On 2016-06-14 03:06, Philipp Kern wrote: On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 07:33:56PM +, Niels Thykier wrote: Philipp Kern: > On 2016-06-05 12:01, Niels Thykier wrote: >> * amd64, i386, armel, armhf, arm64, mips, mipsel, powerpc, ppc64el, >>s390x >>- *No* blockers at this time from RT, DSA no

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On 06/14/2016 09:06 AM, Philipp Kern wrote: > Yeah, but that's unfortunately one of the universal truths of this port. > I mean in theory sometimes they turn up on eBay and people try to make > them work[1]. Hilarious talk, thanks a lot for the link :). > It also seems true for other ports where

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On 14/06/16 09:06, Philipp Kern wrote: > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 07:33:56PM +, Niels Thykier wrote: >> Philipp Kern: >>> On 2016-06-05 12:01, Niels Thykier wrote: * amd64, i386, armel, armhf, arm64, mips, mipsel, powerpc, ppc64el, s390x - *No* blockers at this time from RT

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 07:33:56PM +, Niels Thykier wrote: > Philipp Kern: > > On 2016-06-05 12:01, Niels Thykier wrote: > >> * amd64, i386, armel, armhf, arm64, mips, mipsel, powerpc, ppc64el, > >>s390x > >>- *No* blockers at this time from RT, DSA nor security. > >>- s390, ppc64e

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

Philipp Kern: > On 2016-06-05 12:01, Niels Thykier wrote: >> * amd64, i386, armel, armhf, arm64, mips, mipsel, powerpc, ppc64el, >>s390x >>- *No* blockers at this time from RT, DSA nor security. >>- s390, ppc64el and all arm ports have DSA concerns. > > What is the current DSA concern

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On 2016-06-05 12:01, Niels Thykier wrote: * amd64, i386, armel, armhf, arm64, mips, mipsel, powerpc, ppc64el, s390x - *No* blockers at this time from RT, DSA nor security. - s390, ppc64el and all arm ports have DSA concerns. What is the current DSA concern about s390x? Kind regards a

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On 2016-06-05 8:56 AM, Steven Chamberlain wrote: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: >I have invested lots of time and effort to get sparc64 into a usable state in Debian. >We are close to 11.000 installed packages. Missing packages include Firefox, >Thunderbird/Icedove, golang and LibreOffice to

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

Steven Chamberlain: > Hi, > Hi, > John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: >> I have invested lots of time and effort to get sparc64 into a usable state >> in Debian. >> We are close to 11.000 installed packages. Missing packages include Firefox, >> Thunderbird/Icedove, golang and LibreOffice to name t

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

Hi, On Sun, 2016-06-05 at 13:26 +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > sh4: > > > The two biggest issues with sh4 are currently with binutils and the > kernel. binutils has problems when building Qt5: > There is in fact another big elephant in the room, which I have mentioned several tim

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

thanks to everyone explaining arch:any to me :) -- cheers, Holger signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

Hi, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > I have invested lots of time and effort to get sparc64 into a usable state in > Debian. > We are close to 11.000 installed packages. Missing packages include Firefox, > Thunderbird/Icedove, golang and LibreOffice to name the most important ones. Is there so

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

John Paul Adrian Glaubitz: > Hi Niels! > > On 06/05/2016 12:01 PM, Niels Thykier wrote: >> Beyond mips64el, we are not aware of any new architectures for Stretch. >> >> I kindly ask you to: >> >> * Porters, please assert if your architecture is targeting Stretch. > > To give some insight what's

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On 05/06/16 13:00, Holger Levsen wrote: On Sun, Jun 05, 2016 at 01:26:39PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: ppc64: This architecture is basically on par with the release architectures. We have over 11.000 packages installed [...] sparc64: We are close to 11.000 installed

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

I missing? But around 12000 of those source packages only build Arch: all packages. If you look at amd64's buildd stats in sid, there are ~12000 source packages in the Installed state: https://buildd.debian.org/status/architecture.php?a=amd64&suite=sid i386 also has ~12000; arm64, arm

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On 06/05/2016 02:00 PM, Holger Levsen wrote: > I'm not sure whether you are talking about source or binary packages but > sid/amd64 has over 24000 source packages and over 5 binary packages, > so I would call the above "on par". Or what am I missing? There are just around 12,000 source package

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

On Sun, Jun 05, 2016 at 01:26:39PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > ppc64: > > This architecture is basically on par with the release architectures. We have > over > 11.000 packages installed [...] > sparc64: > We are close to 11.000 installed packages. I'm not sure whether you are tal

Re: [Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

Hi Niels! On 06/05/2016 12:01 PM, Niels Thykier wrote: > Beyond mips64el, we are not aware of any new architectures for Stretch. > > I kindly ask you to: > > * Porters, please assert if your architecture is targeting Stretch. To give some insight what's happening in Debian Ports. We have two c

[Stretch] Status for architecture qualification

Hi members of DSA, Security, RT and all porters. While the freeze still seem far away, I think it is time to start with the architecture qualifications. For starters, here are the architectures we are aware of: * amd64, i386, armel, armhf, arm64, mips, mipsel, powerpc, ppc64el, s390x - *N

Re: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing (Status update)

Hi, b...@decadent.org.uk said: > > I've also provided a couple of kernel patches in the past. I'm cross > > testing with Gentoo to ensure that bugs I report are Debian-specific > > or ia64-generic. > > > > I'll continue testing/software development activity on ia64 for the > > Jessie cycle, and m

Re: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing (Status update)

On 21-Sep-13, at 7:23 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote: I'll continue testing/software development activity on ia64 for the Jessie cycle, and more generally, until Debian drops ia64. I'm already waiting for Wayland on ia64 and other big updates. So please, keep ia64 in the bandwagon ;-) But I don't

Re: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing (Status update)

On Sat, 2013-09-21 at 19:36 +0200, Émeric MASCHINO wrote: > Hi, > > I'm a long-time ia64 Debian user (> 10 years). I'm mostly focused on > desktop aspects (GNOME, Iceweasel, LibreOffice, Qt Creator, C++ 3D > software development) while most other ia64 users that I know are more > inclined on serve

Re: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing (Status update)

Hi, I'm a long-time ia64 Debian user (> 10 years). I'm mostly focused on desktop aspects (GNOME, Iceweasel, LibreOffice, Qt Creator, C++ 3D software development) while most other ia64 users that I know are more inclined on server use. I'm not a DD/DM, but daily update my ia64 workstation, report

Re: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing (Status update)

On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 11:19:24AM -0400, Federico Sologuren wrote: > i have a HP Visualize B2000 that i managed to install last night from iso > distribution that i found after a lot of looking. at this point only > terminal is working. will keep reading to get debian up and running. > > i would

Re: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing (Status update)

i have a HP Visualize B2000 that i managed to install last night from iso distribution that i found after a lot of looking. at this point only terminal is working. will keep reading to get debian up and running. i would like to get involved. will need some additional information on what is needed

Re: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing (Status update)

(Status update) Hi, I am an active tester (not always porter) for the following architectures and I intend to continue this for the lifetime of the jessie release: i386, amd64, armel - test most base packages on this architecture (every day tasks) - test arch-related things - test lots of

Re: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing (Status update)

FWIW, I am a porter of the Alpha architecture in the following ways: - run a buildd - kernel support - work with upstreams for toolchain support - general porting work including filing bugs and patches I doubt if I will continue that for the life cycle of Jessie given that many of the former

Re: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing (Status update)

Hi, I am an active tester (not always porter) for the following architectures and I intend to continue this for the lifetime of the jessie release: i386, amd64, armel - test most base packages on this architecture (every day tasks) - test arch-related things - test lots of ipv6 related issues

Re: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing (Status update)

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 10:38:29AM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote: > Here is a little status update on the mails we have received so far. > First off, thanks to all the porters who have already replied! > > So far, the *no one* has stepped up to back the following architectures: >

Re: Roll call for porters of architectures in sid and testing (Status update)

On 2013-09-01 09:33, Niels Thykier wrote: > Hi, > > As we announced in [LAST-BITS], we would like to get a better idea of > that status of the ports, to make an informed decision about which > port can be released with jessie. One of the steps is to get an > overview of which

Re: status of skype amd64

On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 9:04 AM, Berni Elbourn wrote: > Should do. Its been a while but I used Gizmo with sipgate on N800 with > no problems. Have to say gizmo was nicely presented - but I now use the > Nokia's own sip sw. > > Gizmo might need some trickery to work on amd64. Look here, and bottom

Re: status of skype amd64

Liviu Andronic wrote: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 7:51 PM, Lennart Sorensen wrote: Is there a provider that provides a SIP to land-line jump like skype but using SIP..? Hundreds if not thousands of them. Look up DID service providers. For example: http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/DID+Service+

Re: status of skype amd64

Liviu Andronic wrote: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 7:51 PM, Lennart Sorensen wrote: Is there a provider that provides a SIP to land-line jump like skype but using SIP..? Hundreds if not thousands of them. Look up DID service providers. For example: http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/DID+Service+

Re: status of skype amd64

On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 7:51 PM, Lennart Sorensen wrote: >> Is there a provider that provides a SIP to land-line jump like skype but >> using SIP..? > > Hundreds if not thousands of them. > > Look up DID service providers. > > For example: http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/DID+Service+Providers

Re: status of skype amd64

On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 09:56:15PM -0500, Karl Schmidt wrote: > Lennart Sorensen wrote: > >> Until some day skype decides to open their protocol and actually play >> nice with anyone else, rather than try to build a VoIP monopoly, it >> simply won't happen. >> >> I just tell people to not use skype

Re: status of skype amd64

On 28/06/10 13:22, Liviu Andronic wrote: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 8:38 AM, Berni Elbourn wrote: I have sipgate for years. Gives a local looking phone number too. Does it have a version for Debian? I cannot find one. Thank you Liviu Sip is a voip standard. Happily this means you can use a

Re: status of skype amd64

On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 8:38 AM, Berni Elbourn wrote: > I have sipgate for years. Gives a local looking phone number too. > Does it have a version for Debian? I cannot find one. Thank you Liviu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-amd64-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Tr

Re: status of skype amd64

Michael wrote: Karl, Is there a provider that provides a SIP to land-line jump like skype but using SIP..? ekiga.net (i think), at least to mobiles I have sipgate for years. Gives a local looking phone number too. Berni -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-amd64-requ...@lists.debian.org

Re: status of skype amd64

Karl, > Is there a provider that provides a SIP to land-line jump like skype but > using SIP..? ekiga.net (i think), at least to mobiles -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-amd64-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: htt

Re: status of skype amd64

Lennart Sorensen wrote: Until some day skype decides to open their protocol and actually play nice with anyone else, rather than try to build a VoIP monopoly, it simply won't happen. I just tell people to not use skype. :) Everyone else uses SIP. Is there a provider that provides a SIP to la

Re: status of skype amd64

On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 12:09, Michael wrote: > I found this hint in the skype packages README: > > * On Debian amd64 version Skype crashes on startup with the message: >    "Inconsistency detected by ld.so: dl-open.c: 623: _dl_open: Assertion >    `_dl_debug_initialize (0, args.nsid)->r_state ==

Re: status of skype amd64

Lennart, > I just tell people to not use skype. :) Everyone else uses SIP. I think you are right. A VoIP monopol, that would be a real bad thing. So i'll try to suggest SIP first to anyone. I think it boils down to multiple IMs open at the same time, but that's the price. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE

Re: status of skype amd64

Michael writes: > Thanks for your suggestions ! > > There seem to be at least 3 versions of debian packages: > > skype-debian_2.1.0.81-1_i386.deb > skype_static-2.1.0.81.tar.bz2 > skype-ubuntu-intrepid_2.1.0.81-1_amd64.deb You want the amd64 package even though that contains the just the 32bit

Re: status of skype amd64

On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Michael wrote: > Thanks for your suggestions ! > > There seem to be at least 3 versions of debian packages: > > skype-debian_2.1.0.81-1_i386.deb > skype_static-2.1.0.81.tar.bz2 > skype-ubuntu-intrepid_2.1.0.81-1_amd64.deb > > But i could not get any of these worki

Re: status of skype amd64

On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 05:09:03PM +0200, Michael wrote: > Thanks for your suggestions ! > > There seem to be at least 3 versions of debian packages: > > skype-debian_2.1.0.81-1_i386.deb > skype_static-2.1.0.81.tar.bz2 > skype-ubuntu-intrepid_2.1.0.81-1_amd64.deb > > But i could not get any of

Re: status of skype amd64

Thanks for your suggestions ! There seem to be at least 3 versions of debian packages: skype-debian_2.1.0.81-1_i386.deb skype_static-2.1.0.81.tar.bz2 skype-ubuntu-intrepid_2.1.0.81-1_amd64.deb But i could not get any of these working beyond the license agreement resp. login. I found this hint

Re: status of skype amd64

2010/6/15 Jaime Ochoa Malagón : > you need to install the (ubuntu) amd64 package with ia32-libs... > > http://www.skype.com/intl/en-us/get-skype/on-your-computer/linux/post-download/ > > I have ia32-apt-get and use the normal package... > If you experience crashes with this set-up, try (re)moving /

Re: status of skype amd64

you need to install the (ubuntu) amd64 package with ia32-libs... http://www.skype.com/intl/en-us/get-skype/on-your-computer/linux/post-download/ I have ia32-apt-get and use the normal package... On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Michael wrote: > Hello, > > Does anybody know what's the state of s

status of skype amd64

Hello, Does anybody know what's the state of skype for amd64 ? My first try was, i installed skype-debian_2.1.0.81-1_i386.deb with dpkg --force (btw weird, it does not appear in the apt database afterwards!) Then i launched 'skype' via user and got an error: "Inconsistency detected by ld.so: d

KDE4: icon for Trash does not change status

Hi all, after a screen crash in KDE4, the icon for the trash does no more change its status. Before the screen-crash it changed its icon related to "trash-full" or "trash-empty". How can I fix it? Is there a way to test the status in console, so that I get more informa

KDE4: icon for "Trash" does not change status

Hi all, after a screen crash in KDE4, the icon for the trash does no more change its status. Before the screen-crash it changed its icon related to "trash-full" or "trash-empty". How can I fix it? Is there a way to test the status in console, so that I get more informa

java status on the ports

Besides m68k hopelessly being behind we do have serious problems on alpha, arm and hppa. - on arm, the bytecode compiler (ecj) doesn't produce correct code. there is currently a workaround to build the package on arm using byte-compiled code built on another architecture. Aurelian has m

Re: status of native java JRE ?

On 7 Jan, Alex Malinovich wrote: > > On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 09:50 +1100, Alex Samad wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 02:25:11PM -0800, Max Alekseyev wrote: >> > On Jan 7, 2008 1:43 PM, Alex Samad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> > > > 32-bit java plugin via nspluginwrapper works fine in 64-bit

Re: status of native java JRE ?

On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 07:47:13PM -0800, Max Alekseyev wrote: > On Jan 7, 2008 5:33 PM, Alex Malinovich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 02:25:11PM -0800, Max Alekseyev wrote: > > > > > > 32-bit java plugin via nspluginwrapper works fine in 64-bit > > > > > > browsers.

Re: status of native java JRE ?

On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 05:29:46PM -0800, Alex Malinovich wrote: > On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 09:50 +1100, Alex Samad wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 02:25:11PM -0800, Max Alekseyev wrote: > > > On Jan 7, 2008 1:43 PM, Alex Samad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --snip-- > > > You don't need chroot for t

Re: status of native java JRE ?

On Jan 7, 2008 5:33 PM, Alex Malinovich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 02:25:11PM -0800, Max Alekseyev wrote: > > > > > 32-bit java plugin via nspluginwrapper works fine in 64-bit browsers. [...] > Disregard the previous email. Looks like it doesn't work. > nspluginwrappe

Re: status of native java JRE ?

On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 09:50 +1100, Alex Samad wrote: > On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 02:25:11PM -0800, Max Alekseyev wrote: > > On Jan 7, 2008 1:43 PM, Alex Samad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > 32-bit java plugin via nspluginwrapper works fine in 64-bit browsers. > > > hadn't thought of that, j

Re: status of native java JRE ?

On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 09:50 +1100, Alex Samad wrote: > On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 02:25:11PM -0800, Max Alekseyev wrote: > > On Jan 7, 2008 1:43 PM, Alex Samad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --snip-- > > You don't need chroot for that. Installing ia32-libs or libc6-i386 > > should be enough for running mo

Re: status of native java JRE ?

On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 02:25:11PM -0800, Max Alekseyev wrote: > On Jan 7, 2008 1:43 PM, Alex Samad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > 32-bit java plugin via nspluginwrapper works fine in 64-bit browsers. > > hadn't thought of that, just tried to install the plugin in my chroot and it > > wants to

Re: status of native java JRE ?

On Jan 7, 2008 1:43 PM, Alex Samad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 32-bit java plugin via nspluginwrapper works fine in 64-bit browsers. > hadn't thought of that, just tried to install the plugin in my chroot and it > wants to install a whole bundle of other stuff, including a browser. Did you > i

Re: status of native java JRE ?

On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 10:57:49AM +0100, Helge Hafting wrote: > You can use konqueror, a 64-bit web browser that is able to use > Sun java without a mozilla-style plugin. Many sites, especially > java compliance test sites, works fine with this. As well as > many java games. > > Some sites do not

Re: status of native java JRE ?

On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 09:35:39AM -0800, Max Alekseyev wrote: > On Oct 27, 2007 4:10 PM, Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > The sun desktop demo works fine so far - is there really no way to get sun > > java6 into iceweasel ? > > > > What is the recommendet approach ? > > 32-bit java plug

Re: status of native java JRE ?

On Oct 27, 2007 4:10 PM, Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The sun desktop demo works fine so far - is there really no way to get sun > java6 into iceweasel ? > > What is the recommendet approach ? 32-bit java plugin via nspluginwrapper works fine in 64-bit browsers. Max -- To UNSUBSCRIBE

Re: status of native java JRE ?

On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 10:57 +0100, Helge Hafting wrote: > Michael wrote: > > Hey, > > > > What's the status for native-amd64 java support for mozilla browsers in > > debian unstable today ? > > > > AFAIKS there's sun java5/6 jre and gij 4.2 but

Re: status of native java JRE ?

Michael wrote: Hey, What's the status for native-amd64 java support for mozilla browsers in debian unstable today ? AFAIKS there's sun java5/6 jre and gij 4.2 but they have no browser plugin. You can use konqueror, a 64-bit web browser that is able to use Sun java without a moz

Re: status of native java JRE ?

As example answer to my last question, here is a nice little java thingy that works with blackdown j2re: (mark a chart sect = zoom) This one does not work: (should popup

Re: status of native java JRE ?

I found the GCJ Web Browser Plugin 0.95 (package gcjwebplugin) It pops up with: "GNU Classpath's security implementation is not complete. HOSTILE APPLETS WILL STEAL AND/OR DESTROY YOUR DATA!" and afterwards doesn't work either. Probably i would be satisfied with only some rudimentary browser j

status of native java JRE ?

Hey, What's the status for native-amd64 java support for mozilla browsers in debian unstable today ? AFAIKS there's sun java5/6 jre and gij 4.2 but they have no browser plugin. Then there is balckdown j2re 1.4 plugin but that's old and doesn't work. At least, judged by

[D-I] Kernel/module udebs status - massbuild script update

(Reply-to set to debian-boot list) kernel udeb status == Because I had to test the changes below anyway, I have done what I guess will be my last massbuild and upload of kernel/module udebs. All arches are now at 2.6.21-2, with the following exceptions: - sparc: at 2.6.20

Re: aptitude "initialising package status" takes _really_ long

BARBIER Jean-Matthieu wrote: > This problem have been fixed in experimental... ..and it has been uploaded to unstable: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-changes/2007/07/msg00193.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTEC

Re: aptitude "initialising package status" takes _really_ long

li 2007 schrieb Wolfgang Mader: > > > > Hello list, > > > > > > > > at the start of aptitude and after every action you have took, > > > > aptitude has to initialise its package status. This is the same step > > > > as "loading cache"

Re: aptitude "initialising package status" takes _really_ long

e start of aptitude and after every action you have took, aptitude > > > has to initialise its package status. This is the same step as "loading > > > cache". Yesterday I have updated aptitude to . Since > > > then this step takes _really_ long. Lets sa

  1   2   3   4   >