Re: stopped services
On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 06:07:00AM +0200, Francesco Pietra wrote: > Although not specific to 64bit, my interest is here: Please, ask on debian-user when you know it's not an amd64 question. > Services/applications (such as gnome) stopped by renaming the soft link in > the > specific runlel are still updated/upgraded when running aptitude or apt-get? GNOME is not a service. If you see particular services which are disabled being restarted then that is a bug - please report them. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
stopped services
Although not specific to 64bit, my interest is here: Services/applications (such as gnome) stopped by renaming the soft link in the specific runlel are still updated/upgraded when running aptitude or apt-get? thanks francesco pietra -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GNOME and Firefox not working on latest unstable
Hello All, I've updated two days ago my unstable version of Debian for AMD64 and it seems that GNOME has some troubles to be executed: the same happens also with gnome-terminal and firefox (it takes the 99% of resources but it's not shown). X is performing fine, so maybe some library has been changed; I've updated this morning all the files but nothing changed. Can you help me ? Thanks, Regards, Max
Re: Broken applications: Openoffice on AMD64
Hi, Gudjon I. Gudjonsson wrote: > >Edit openoffice.org-2.0.3/debian/rules and there is some variable > build_amd64???=n that should be y > I only started building it seemed to work properly after that change. This is right. It works... until some error occurs. :-/ So here is the way to make it works: 1) Get the source from the Debian repository apt-get source openoffice.org 2) Get the package needed to compile this (as root) su -c 'apt-get build-dep openoffice.org' 3) Move to the build directory cd openoffice-* 4) Ask to build the amd64 arch packages In debian/rules change the 'BUILD_AMD64=n' in 'BUILD_AMD64=y'. 5) Build the package (this might take quite a while) dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -us -uc Then, I hit an error in cpp_uno. Briefly, it seems that the bridge interface has changed and this piece of code hasn't been updated: bridges::cpp_uno::shared::UnoInterfaceProxy::dispatch(uno_Interface*, const typelib_TypeDescription*, void*, void**, uno_Any**)' member function declared in class 'bridges::cpp_uno::shared::UnoInterfaceProxy' dmake: Error code 1, while making ==[Complete error log]= g++ -Wreturn-type -fmessage-length=0 -c -I. -I. -I../inc -I../../../inc -I../../../unx/inc -I../../../unxlngx6.pro/inc -I. -I/openoffice.org-2.0.3/ooo-build/build/ooc680-m7/solver/680/unxlngx6.pro/inc/stl -I/openoffice.org-2.0.3/ooo-build/build/ooc680-m7/solver/680/unxlngx6.pro/inc/external -I/openoffice.org-2.0.3/ooo-build/build/ooc680-m7/solver/680/unxlngx6.pro/inc -I/openoffice.org-2.0.3/ooo-build/build/ooc680-m7/solenv/unxlngx6/inc -I/openoffice.org-2.0.3/ooo-build/build/ooc680-m7/solenv/inc -I/openoffice.org-2.0.3/ooo-build/build/ooc680-m7/res -I/openoffice.org-2.0.3/stlport/stlport -I/openoffice.org-2.0.3/stlport/include/stlport -I/openoffice.org-2.0.3/stlport/include/stlport -I/openoffice.org-2.0.3/ooo-build/build/ooc680-m7/solenv/inc/Xp31 -INO_JAVA_HOME/include -INO_JAVA_HOME/include/linux -INO_JAVA_HOME/include/native_threads/include -I/usr/include -I. -I../../../res -I. -O0 -DLEAK_STATIC_DATA -pipe -Wno-ctor-dtor-privacy -fno-use-cxa-atexit -fvisibility-inlines-hidden -g1 -fexceptions -fno-enforce-eh-specs -fpic -DLINUX -DUNX -DVCL -DGCC -DC341 -DX86_64 -DCVER=C341 -D_USE_NAMESPACE -DNPTL -DGLIBC=2 -DX86_64 -D_PTHREADS -D_REENTRANT -DNEW_SOLAR -D_USE_NAMESPACE=1 -DSTLPORT_VERSION=400 -DHAVE_GCC_VISIBILITY_FEATURE -D__DMAKE -DUNIX -DCPPU_ENV=gcc3 -DGXX_INCLUDE_PATH=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.1.2/../../../../include/c++/4.1.2 -DSUPD=680 -DPRODUCT -DNDEBUG -DPRODUCT_FULL -DOSL_DEBUG_LEVEL=0 -DEXCEPTIONS_ON -DCUI -DOOC680=OOC680 -DSHAREDLIB -D_DLL_ -DMULTITHREAD -o ../../../unxlngx6.pro/slo/uno2cpp.o /openoffice.org-2.0.3/ooo-build/build/ooc680-m7/bridges/source/cpp_uno/gcc3_linux_x86-64/uno2cpp.cxx /openoffice.org-2.0.3/ooo-build/build/ooc680-m7/bridges/source/cpp_uno/gcc3_linux_x86-64/uno2cpp.cxx: In function 'void invoke_copy_to_stack(sal_uInt64*, char*, sal_uInt64*, sal_uInt64*, double*)': /openoffice.org-2.0.3/ooo-build/build/ooc680-m7/bridges/source/cpp_uno/gcc3_linux_x86-64/uno2cpp.cxx:122: warning: converting to 'long unsigned int' from 'double' /openoffice.org-2.0.3/ooo-build/build/ooc680-m7/bridges/source/cpp_uno/gcc3_linux_x86-64/uno2cpp.cxx: At global scope: /openoffice.org-2.0.3/ooo-build/build/ooc680-m7/bridges/source/cpp_uno/gcc3_linux_x86-64/uno2cpp.cxx:519: error: no 'void bridges::cpp_uno::shared::UnoInterfaceProxy::dispatch(uno_Interface*, const typelib_TypeDescription*, void*, void**, uno_Any**)' member function declared in class 'bridges::cpp_uno::shared::UnoInterfaceProxy' dmake: Error code 1, while making '../../../unxlngx6.pro/slo/uno2cpp.obj' '---* tg_merge.mk *---' dmake: Error code 255, while making 'do_it_noopt' '---* tg_merge.mk *---' ERROR: Error 65280 occurred while making /openoffice.org-2.0.3/ooo-build/build/ooc680-m7/bridges/source/cpp_uno/gcc3_linux_x86-64 make[1]: *** [stamp/build] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/openoffice.org-2.0.3/ooo-build' make: *** [debian/stampdir/build] Error 2 === Moreover, when using the packages from http://people.debian.org/~rene/openoffice.org/2.0.3/amd64/. Saving seems to be ok but restoring gives: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ ooimpress test.odp *** glibc detected *** free(): invalid pointer: 0x010855f0 *** Meaning that some pointer address has been lost (probably because of some abusive cast). -- Emmanuel Fleury | Office: 211 Associate Professor, | Phone: +33 (0)5 40 00 35 24 LaBRI, Domaine Universitaire | Fax: +33 (0)5 40 00 66 69 351, Cours de la Libération | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 33405 Talence Cedex, France | URL: http://www.labri.fr/~fleury -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 stable release signature problems?
On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 04:03:01PM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 12:19:54PM -0400, Ed L. Cashin wrote: > > Has there been any news about the amd64 BADSIG on the Release file at > > amd64.debian.net? > > If you are running etch, why are you still pointing a deb source at > amd64.debian.net at all? If I recall correctly, the ntpdate from stable wasn't in etch. ... > Not sure about this, but I think the simple answer is to just not use > amd64.debian.net anymore. I can get rid of the error that way, but I still am curious about why there's a bad signature on the release file for the amd64 stable APT repository. -- Ed L Cashin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 stable release signature problems?
On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 12:19:54PM -0400, Ed L. Cashin wrote: > Has there been any news about the amd64 BADSIG on the Release file at > amd64.debian.net? If you are running etch, why are you still pointing a deb source at amd64.debian.net at all? > I checked the archives but didn't see any further followups. I still > get the error if I include the stable amd64 APT repo in my list of > sources. > > makki:~# cat /etc/apt/sources.list > deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ testing main > deb http://amd64.debian.net/debian-amd64/ stable main > makki:~# apt-get update > Get:1 http://ftp.us.debian.org testing Release.gpg [189B] > Hit http://ftp.us.debian.org testing Release > Hit http://ftp.us.debian.org testing/main Packages/DiffIndex > Get:2 http://amd64.debian.net stable Release.gpg [189B] > Hit http://amd64.debian.net stable Release > Err http://amd64.debian.net stable Release > > Get:3 http://amd64.debian.net stable Release [4813B] > Ign http://amd64.debian.net stable Release > Ign http://amd64.debian.net stable/main Packages/DiffIndex > Hit http://amd64.debian.net stable/main Packages > Fetched 5003B in 1s (4674B/s) > Reading package lists... Done > W: GPG error: http://amd64.debian.net stable Release: The following > signatures were invalid: BADSIG E415B2B4B5F5BBED Debian AMD64 Archive Key > > W: You may want to run apt-get update to correct these problems > > ... and ... > > makki:~# apt-key list > /etc/apt/trusted.gpg > > pub 1024R/1DB114E0 2004-01-15 [expired: 2005-01-27] > uid Debian Archive Automatic Signing Key (2004) <[EMAIL > PROTECTED]> > > pub 1024D/4F368D5D 2005-01-31 [expired: 2006-01-31] > uid Debian Archive Automatic Signing Key (2005) <[EMAIL > PROTECTED]> > > pub 1024D/B5F5BBED 2005-04-24 > uid Debian AMD64 Archive Key > > sub 2048g/34FC6FE5 2005-04-24 > > pub 1024D/2D230C5F 2006-01-03 [expires: 2007-02-07] > uid Debian Archive Automatic Signing Key (2006) <[EMAIL > PROTECTED]> > > > I thought maybe there would be a new key out, even though the AMD64 > Archive Key doesn't mention expiration, but I didn't see any Debian > AMD64 Archive Key in the keyrings here: > > http://amd64.debian.net/debian-amd64/doc/debian-keyring.tar.gz Not sure about this, but I think the simple answer is to just not use amd64.debian.net anymore. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: debian amd64 and linux certifications
On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 03:14:26PM -0400, Robert Isaac wrote: > The lpi certification covers both .deb and .rpm package managers in > its 101 test. When I did the first part of LPI 101 a couple of years ago, the debian stuff was pretty new I think. A lot of the general quesions were still very redhat centric though, asking idiotic questions about sendmail, and a few other programs that redhat uses by default, but debian certainly does not (and in my opinion most sane admins do not use either because they like to stay sane). I wasn't particularly impressed by LPI's test. Maybe it has gotten better since. > Certifications are really just a way to get past HR and are generally > meaningless beyond the resume. Good luck, though! Agree entirely. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: debian amd64 and linux certifications
On 7/25/06, Gnu-Raiz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Tuesday 25 July 2006 08:08, Christian Powers wrote: > Anyone, > I am currently a Debian only user at home and at work. Most > of my computers are running 64bit kernels and of course the > others are running 32bit systems and an ARM type system. I am > currently working on gaining some "official" knowledge of Linux > and actually having proof of it. I have been looking closely at > going for the Linux + certification. I understand from reading a > little online, that the test officially uses the RPM package > manager, and thought I would pose this question to the group. Are > there any other Linux certifications that would be either Linux > generic (no special reference to .deb. or rpm, etc), or is the > Linux + something that would be recommended? Any Ideas on Linux > certifications would be greatly appreciated. I don't think there is a Debian specific certification, most places offer a general Linux certification. For instance CompTIA offers such a course. http://certification.comptia.org/linux/ Also another popular option that offers exams at various places can be found. http://www.lpi.org/en/home.html Not to mention a lot of local colleges, and Universities offer classes and some might do certification. A year or so ago I took an online class that used the compTIA book, called Linus+ Guide to Linux Certification. It was to prepare a person for the compTIA test. I got a good grade on the course but never took the official test. The information was a little dated, and focused mostly on general Linux terms. I have heard that they have a new book out, and some of the information have changed. Here is another link that might be of interest. http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/topics/linux/certification This is for the lpi I believe, but might link up to a local university, as I recall if you bought one of their books, you had an option to take an online course, then take an exam. I do think that these certifications might help you get a job, but the Kernel changes so quickly, and so do the applications that it might be limited in its use. I do think that being involved in a project would look even better. But I guess every little bit helps, regardless of how useful it is. Gnu-Raiz The lpi certification covers both .deb and .rpm package managers in its 101 test. Certifications are really just a way to get past HR and are generally meaningless beyond the resume. Good luck, though! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: amd64 stable release signature problems?
Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Jo Shields <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > T?r?k Edvin wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> Today I got this error while running `aptitude update`: > >> > >> W: GPG error: http://amd64.debian.net stable Release: The following > >> signatures were invalid: BADSIG E415B2B4B5F5BBED Debian AMD64 Archive > >> Key ... > Doh, it is BADSIG. That means the signature in Release.gpg does not > match the Release file. Doesn't matter who signed it or if the key is > known, it is just broken. > > > Ganneff, can you check this and comment? Has there been any news about the amd64 BADSIG on the Release file at amd64.debian.net? I checked the archives but didn't see any further followups. I still get the error if I include the stable amd64 APT repo in my list of sources. makki:~# cat /etc/apt/sources.list deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ testing main deb http://amd64.debian.net/debian-amd64/ stable main makki:~# apt-get update Get:1 http://ftp.us.debian.org testing Release.gpg [189B] Hit http://ftp.us.debian.org testing Release Hit http://ftp.us.debian.org testing/main Packages/DiffIndex Get:2 http://amd64.debian.net stable Release.gpg [189B] Hit http://amd64.debian.net stable Release Err http://amd64.debian.net stable Release Get:3 http://amd64.debian.net stable Release [4813B] Ign http://amd64.debian.net stable Release Ign http://amd64.debian.net stable/main Packages/DiffIndex Hit http://amd64.debian.net stable/main Packages Fetched 5003B in 1s (4674B/s) Reading package lists... Done W: GPG error: http://amd64.debian.net stable Release: The following signatures were invalid: BADSIG E415B2B4B5F5BBED Debian AMD64 Archive Key W: You may want to run apt-get update to correct these problems ... and ... makki:~# apt-key list /etc/apt/trusted.gpg pub 1024R/1DB114E0 2004-01-15 [expired: 2005-01-27] uid Debian Archive Automatic Signing Key (2004) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pub 1024D/4F368D5D 2005-01-31 [expired: 2006-01-31] uid Debian Archive Automatic Signing Key (2005) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pub 1024D/B5F5BBED 2005-04-24 uid Debian AMD64 Archive Key sub 2048g/34FC6FE5 2005-04-24 pub 1024D/2D230C5F 2006-01-03 [expires: 2007-02-07] uid Debian Archive Automatic Signing Key (2006) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I thought maybe there would be a new key out, even though the AMD64 Archive Key doesn't mention expiration, but I didn't see any Debian AMD64 Archive Key in the keyrings here: http://amd64.debian.net/debian-amd64/doc/debian-keyring.tar.gz -- Ed L Cashin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: debian amd64 and linux certifications
On Tuesday 25 July 2006 08:08, Christian Powers wrote: > Anyone, > I am currently a Debian only user at home and at work. Most > of my computers are running 64bit kernels and of course the > others are running 32bit systems and an ARM type system. I am > currently working on gaining some "official" knowledge of Linux > and actually having proof of it. I have been looking closely at > going for the Linux + certification. I understand from reading a > little online, that the test officially uses the RPM package > manager, and thought I would pose this question to the group. Are > there any other Linux certifications that would be either Linux > generic (no special reference to .deb. or rpm, etc), or is the > Linux + something that would be recommended? Any Ideas on Linux > certifications would be greatly appreciated. I don't think there is a Debian specific certification, most places offer a general Linux certification. For instance CompTIA offers such a course. http://certification.comptia.org/linux/ Also another popular option that offers exams at various places can be found. http://www.lpi.org/en/home.html Not to mention a lot of local colleges, and Universities offer classes and some might do certification. A year or so ago I took an online class that used the compTIA book, called Linus+ Guide to Linux Certification. It was to prepare a person for the compTIA test. I got a good grade on the course but never took the official test. The information was a little dated, and focused mostly on general Linux terms. I have heard that they have a new book out, and some of the information have changed. Here is another link that might be of interest. http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/topics/linux/certification This is for the lpi I believe, but might link up to a local university, as I recall if you bought one of their books, you had an option to take an online course, then take an exam. I do think that these certifications might help you get a job, but the Kernel changes so quickly, and so do the applications that it might be limited in its use. I do think that being involved in a project would look even better. But I guess every little bit helps, regardless of how useful it is. Gnu-Raiz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: debian amd64 and linux certifications
On 7/25/06, Hemlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 08:45:16 -0400, Christian Powers wrote > Anyone, lpi.org Yes, there are two 101 exams you can take, one geared towards rpm and the other is greared towards dpkg. Your choice. Cheers, I think that just changed so that both package managers are covered in the same exam. It isn't easy to find on their site, so here's a link: https://www.lpi.org/en/news_item/125 -- Matt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: debian amd64 and linux certifications
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 08:45:16 -0400, Christian Powers wrote > Anyone, lpi.org Yes, there are two 101 exams you can take, one geared towards rpm and the other is greared towards dpkg. Your choice. Cheers, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
debian amd64 and linux certifications
Anyone, I am currently a Debian only user at home and at work. Most of my computers are running 64bit kernels and of course the others are running 32bit systems and an ARM type system. I am currently working on gaining some "official" knowledge of Linux and actually having proof of it. I have been looking closely at going for the Linux + certification. I understand from reading a little online, that the test officially uses the RPM package manager, and thought I would pose this question to the group. Are there any other Linux certifications that would be either Linux generic (no special reference to .deb. or rpm, etc), or is the Linux + something that would be recommended? Any Ideas on Linux certifications would be greatly appreciated. -- Christian
Re: debian amd64 and linux certifications
On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 08:45:16AM -0400, Christian Powers wrote: > Anyone, > What certifications? -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sanchez http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto signature.asc Description: Digital signature
debian amd64 and linux certifications
Anyone,-- Christian
Re: Broken applications: Openoffice on AMD64
On Thu, 20 Jul 2006, sigi wrote: I'm using this package since it's released, and had only very few crashes. OOo only crashes while opening some MS-word files - with some others it has no problem. Saving documents failed never here - neither on .odt nor .doc-files. Mostly I use OOo-writer - and that package seems to work very well. Well, I did experience problems on a sarge box, related to java (on which openoffice heavily relies). The problem persisted with the java runtime environments from sun, ibm, blackdown, and apparently was simply due to java triggering a bug in the libfreetype packaged in sarge. I compiled the sid libfreetype6 package from source on sarge, installed it and the problem disappeared completely, with no ill effects apparently. Since this appeared to be a difficult to track problem, I failed to report it, but here it is. I could reproduce it consistently by running through the wizard to produce a fax template. Bye Giacomo -- _ Giacomo Mulas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _ OSSERVATORIO ASTRONOMICO DI CAGLIARI Str. 54, Loc. Poggio dei Pini * 09012 Capoterra (CA) Tel. (OAC): +39 070 71180 248 Fax : +39 070 71180 222 Tel. (UNICA): +39 070 675 4916 _ "When the storms are raging around you, stay right where you are" (Freddy Mercury) _ -- Il messaggio e' stato analizzato alla ricerca di virus o contenuti pericolosi da MailScanner, ed e' risultato non infetto. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Mpqc-users] reiserfs/md1/failure/threads
Francesco Pietra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > First I checked the HDs, reseeding dimms. OK. > > Then, because reiserfs 3.6 of my choice was unanimously considered > inappropriate for amd64, I reinstalled amd64 Deabian etch with daily-build > netinstall: primary partitions for boot, root, and swap, alongside logical > partitions /usr, /var, tmp, /home, ext3 throughout. > > Finally I run memtest86+ v1.65 booting it from CD as it is, without > intervening on BIOS. With option "ECC OFF" for nearly eight hours (two full > passes and a quarter) no memory error was detected. > > Then I discovered that Ctrl-c allows setting memtest86+ "ECC ON" while > running. The test is now at merely 18% without errors. > > The reason for e-mail now is to ask if this is a correct procedure with > memtest86+ for my eigth slots of Kingston ECC , 1GB each. I looked on > internet but it was not clear. > > At any event, calculations with mpqc with Thread will probably be a more > stringent test than present one. > > Thanks for advice on for-last paragraph. > > francesco We had memtest often not fail but real life use then reports bluesmoke errors or crashes. Seems that for todays ram memtest is quite useless short of detecting totaly broken ram. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Broken applications: Openoffice on AMD64
Hi Edit openoffice.org-2.0.3/debian/rules and there is some variable build_amd64???=n that should be y I only started building it seemed to work properly after that change. Hope it helps Gudjon Þann Mánudagur 24. júlí 2006 23:13 skrifaði Emmanuel Fleury: > Hi, > > A J Stiles wrote: > > I do not *want* pre-built .debs. What I specifically want is to compile > > the whole thing from source on my own machine. > > Do the following: > > 1) Get the sources: > apt-get source openoffice.org > > 2) Get the packages needed to compile it: > su -c 'apt-get build-dep openoffice.org' > > 3) Go in the directory: > cd openoffice.org-2.0.3 > > 4) Build-it: > dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -us -uc > > ... > > Unfortunately, it doesn't work. :-/ > > I get a lot of errors: > > ... > dpkg-genchanges: warning: package openoffice.org-l10n-cy in control file > but not in files list > dpkg-genchanges: warning: package openoffice.org-l10n-ko in control file > but not in files list > dpkg-genchanges: warning: package openoffice.org-l10n-fr in control file > but not in files list > dpkg-genchanges: warning: package openoffice.org-l10n-hr in control file > but not in files list > dpkg-genchanges: warning: package openoffice.org-l10n-ar in control file > but not in files list > dpkg-genchanges: warning: package openoffice.org-l10n-ja in control file > but not in files list > dpkg-genchanges: not including original source code in upload > dpkg-buildpackage: binary and diff upload (original source NOT included) > > If you find the way to get through this tell me, because I also would > like to compile it. :) > > Regards > -- > Emmanuel Fleury | Office: 211 > Associate Professor, | Phone: +33 (0)5 40 00 35 24 > LaBRI, Domaine Universitaire | Fax: +33 (0)5 40 00 66 69 > 351, Cours de la Libération | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 33405 Talence Cedex, France | URL: http://www.labri.fr/~fleury
